Natsios On Bush’s Darfur Strategy: ‘The Purpose of These Sanctions Is Not Sanctions’
Natsios On Bush’s Darfur Strategy: ‘The Purpose of These Sanctions Is Not Sanctions’
Yesterday, President Bush announced a new set of economic sanctions on the Sudanese government, pledging to help the victims of the genocide. “I promise this to the people of Darfur. The United States will not avert our eyes from a crisis that challenges the conscience of the world,” he said.
But Bush conviently “averted” his eyes from the role of oil in the Darfur crisis. “The sanctions will do little to stem Sudan’s oil exports, which are the main source of the country’s wealth, analysts said.”
Those companies excluded from the sanctions include China National Petroleum Corp and Gum Arabic Co., one of the world’s largest exporters of an ingredient used in soft drinks and makeup. In creating these loopholes, Bush effectively exonerated the Chinese government, which is investing heavily in Sudan’s oil industry and selling weapons to its army.
Yesterday, U.S. ambassador to Sudan Andrew Natsios offered this explanation for the toothless sanctions:
The purpose of these sanctions is not sanctions. [Their] purpose is to send a message to the Sudanese government to start behaving differently when they deal with their own people.
Watch it:
In the briefing, Natsios claimed sanctions on large oil firms would be “extreme” and even “militant.”
John Prendergast has more at the Enough Project.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
25 Responses to “Natsios On Bush’s Darfur Strategy: ‘The Purpose of These Sanctions Is Not Sanctions’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Well saying you are doing something and not actually doing it isn’t gonna get the buggers to change.
By the way, the right wingers consistently call liberal opposition to this war as appeasement of the terrorists, i.e. calling us all Neville Chamberlains. Well, I would call this appeasement of the Chinese government which, being a large nation, is much more dangers than a few extremists using hit and run tactics. China can hit again and again and again because as a nation they have the economic and thus military power to do so.
May 30th, 2007 at 9:24 pmGroucho, drop the duck. The magic word is militant.
May 30th, 2007 at 9:24 pmonly six years too late. not bad for bush considering it took him 25 years to realize he was an embarrassing drug-addled alcoholic. i take that back. hes still embarrassing.
May 30th, 2007 at 9:28 pmWhy, all of a sudden, does Chimpy give a rats ass about Darfur? Did they find large oil reserves there?
May 30th, 2007 at 9:48 pmThis is the guy who said the “war” in Iraq would cost the American Taxpayers no more than 1.6 billion dollars. Ted Kopel asked him over and over and he repeated himself over and over.
May 30th, 2007 at 9:58 pm“The purpose of these sanctions is not sanctions.”
Our government has now officially adopted newspeak.
War Is Peace.
Freedom Is Slavery.
“Wake Up! It’s 1984.” –Oingo Boingo
May 30th, 2007 at 9:58 pm- George W Bush May 29, 2007
“I promise this to the people of Darfur. The United States will not avert our eyes from a crisis that challenges the conscience of the world,â€
-George W Bush September 15, 2005
“And tonight I also offer this pledge of the American people: Throughout the area hit by the hurricane, we will do what it takes, we will stay as long as it takes, to help citizens rebuild their communities and their lives.”
The people of Darfur are fu*ked.
May 30th, 2007 at 10:04 pmIt’s a boondoggle.
May 30th, 2007 at 10:06 pmLet’s see… gay guys in Alabama are potentially terrorists, but when it comes to Darfur, sanctions aren’t really sanctions, there just messages.
Ya gotta love that GOP logic, folks. Up is down, good is bad, and George Bush knows what he’s doing…
May 30th, 2007 at 10:13 pmThe purpose of these sanctions is PR spin. Nothing more. The appearance of doing something.
Did you know that many of the Africans sold into slavery and shipped to America in the 18th & early 19th centuries came from the Western Sudan/Darfur region?
May 30th, 2007 at 10:16 pmThe message has been sent: the government of the United States has thrown a bone, the only bone it will throw to the raped population of Darfur. That message is the following: Because of the incredible hidden costs of the war on Iraq (er, mean terror), it is necessary to further bend over to the Chinese who are buying are debt by the er, container load. We can’t piss off the Chinese or else they will pull the plug and the entire house of cards will collapse. Aside from that we are still whores of the oil industry. So when we say sanctions, we really mean no sanctions. Believe nothing we say. We are so pathetically lost that it is doubtful the country will be structured the same in 15 years. Enough about us. Godspeed good people of Darfur, because if we know the Chinese, you’ll be dead soon anyway.
May 30th, 2007 at 10:16 pm“The people of Darfur are fu*ked.
Comment by Spudge_Boy — May 30, 2007 @ 10:04 pm”
Excellent post.
I wonder if someone had the years to spend doing such comparisons between every one of Bush’s solemn promises and his lack of action how long the final list would be… A couple miles?
May 30th, 2007 at 10:21 pm“Did you know that many of the Africans sold into slavery and shipped to America in the 18th & early 19th centuries came from the Western Sudan/Darfur region?
Comment by david — May 30, 2007 @ 10:16 pm”
Did you know that those poeple used the bible to justify doing so?
May 30th, 2007 at 10:22 pmDid you know that many of the Africans sold into slavery and shipped to America in the 18th & early 19th centuries came from the Western Sudan/Darfur region?
Is this true? I thought most of the Africans that ended up in the New World came from the west coast of Africa. Sudan is all the way to the est, next ot Egypt. That’s one long, difficult trip by ship.
May 30th, 2007 at 10:44 pmthe Alice in Wonderland style of governing.
Every day we fall farther down the rabbit hole.
First the trial! Then the evidence!
It’s insane.
May 30th, 2007 at 10:48 pmOf course this *seems* like a contradiction, but you guys didn’t here him out:
The purpose of these sanctions is not sanctions. [Their] purpose is to send a message to the Sudanese government to start behaving differently when they deal with their own people.
But it is also a message to the people, for it is in them that Absolute Spirit will manifest. Accordingly once the negation of the message given to the Sudanese government is, in turn, negated, only then will the Opening of Being-in-itself carve away the Nothingness. This will allow Man as Other than Being to appear as the Idea of Otherness in Man, which is not him.
May 30th, 2007 at 11:24 pmAnd I hope this teaches those 3 guys a lesson.
May 30th, 2007 at 11:46 pmIt’s the UN’s job to fix Darfur, not Bush’s.
Let them deal with it.
May 30th, 2007 at 11:53 pmWhat a frickin’ waste of time — and skin.
May 31st, 2007 at 12:02 am#7
Liberals repeatedly make the point that Bush is not the United States.
Therefore, when he says that “The United States will not avert its eyes”, he clearly wasn’t talking about himself, and is free to personally avert away to his heart’s content.
May 31st, 2007 at 12:08 amUS Ambassador Natsios is a Bush Regime certified nut!
May 31st, 2007 at 12:10 amOnce a Texas oil-nazi, always a Texas oil-nazi…
May 31st, 2007 at 12:47 amOh, I get it now - they have oil, we want and need the cheap oil. Yes, of course we’ll protect the corrupt government and/or the rebels; whatever it takes to keep the wagon rolling.
May 31st, 2007 at 7:31 amHelp counter the racism of Jane Zucker toward Darfurians by making donations in her name.
June 4th, 2007 at 5:30 pm“Liberals repeatedly make the point that Bush is not the United States.”
Not that repeatedly. It’s usually that conservatives/the GOP/corporate interests are not the United States, rather than chimpy boy who so clearly isn’t the statement is redundant.
In fact, I don’t think conservatives believe that either. Or do they quietly subscribe to the philosophy that the president can say “l’etat c’est moi”?
“Therefore, when he says that “The United States will not avert its eyesâ€, he clearly wasn’t talking about himself, and is free to personally avert away to his heart’s content.”
June 7th, 2007 at 8:11 amRight, because Bush doesn’t represent the will of the American people. Nailed it!