Clearly, if their is a humanitarian crisis in Dafur then something has to be done to help those who are being oppressed. But lets not play that "Holier than Thou" card when it comes to picking sides in such types of crisises; Observe:

For four (many) long years, the US was a major, if not the chief obstacle to international efforts to bring security to Palestine. The US blocked, vetoed or diluted resolutions at the U.N. Security Council that would have authorized a protection operation or sanctions on Isreal for continued intransigence.

And there are more pragraphs in the article where this type of find/replace can be relevant and holds true, but the US sure gets its share of Olympics doesn't it? The Chinese are no different than the US. Its a political game and our own (American) propaganda leads us to think we are inherently better than everyone else when the facts prove otherwise. Ultimately, the American regime(s) have been equally as self serving as every other country's. Lets all at least be honest about it.

Right now. Not blue helmets but soldiers in the PLA following the orders of the PRC. Of course in next door C.A.R. there are 5000 French troops protecting rebel forces crossing over into Congo to get their hands on priceless Coltan resources. Also Libya is engaged in a game with Sudan alternately blocking refugees or kidnapping them. But yessss - it's the US's fault.

You do realize, you are trying to link China's forign policy, or rather, a lack of forign policy toward a single African state to next year's Olmypic games? For starters, if what China ISN'T doing in Africa is a reason enough to question it hosting the Olympics, then what's your take on London 2012? UK, in this case, is not only "complict" in Iraq's humantarian disastor, but rather DIRECTLY responsible, and let's not even get into Chicago.

You also seem to forget, modern Olympics was founded for humanity, not NATO, or only those who share western culture values. An authoritian goverment that lifted most people out of poverty in human history is I think, at least relatively, a lot closer to the Olympic sprit than any demoratic countrie's economical sanctions, or invasions of an already poor coutry. The virtues of demoracy is in its effect, not its name. To blindly worship democracy and denounce anything else, without regard for their actual actions, is as blind as the once popular support for Communism.

Besides, China does not have the tradition of using trade as a weapon, neither does it have, and I must say, the much dispised tradition of poking their nose in other countries internal affairs. Perhaps that's not your idea of being a responsible member of itnernational community, and perhaps you would be right, but if you take a look at the history books, its not hard to see, whatever you have been doing, it hasn't made Africa any better off today than it was 50 years ago, if not much worse, and there's no reaon to believe it will start working anytime soon.

To borrow a quote from Churchhill, it could be said the forign policiy of non-interference trade is the worst kind of forign policy, but its better than any other that has been tried, espically when it come to Africa.

Sudan's problem is a problem only Sudaness can solve, and economical sanctions solves nothing. Its the international community's responsibility to help, not to dictate. Africa need more trade, more respect, not more aid or pity.

Jill,

American and English interests are working overtime to make everyone concerned about the Darfur "genocide" for two reasons:

1) It takes the emphasis off of the REAL Iraqi genocide and;

2) It hides the fact that said interests are trying to open up Sudan to the privatization of their oil assets and massive debt at the hand of the IMF.

(See Michael Chossudovsky's "The Globalization of Poverty")

Grow up and stop writing sophomoric articles, you are adding to the problem.

"if what China ISN'T doing in Africa is a reason enough"

It's what they ARE doing that's the problem. They're blocking efforts to curtail Sudan's leadership while they exploit the natural resources of the country. Do some research.

Regardless of if we link the Olympics to Darfur or not, the fact remains that the standpoint with which we consider China itself is fundamentally flawed. For some reason, we expect China to have the same values as America (America in principle, if not in practice). Yet China is an authoritarian regime who routinely violates the human rights of its citizens.

Take a look: Myanmar, together with Iran, North Korea, and Sudan, all have one big thing in common. They are all good friends with China.

In this new axis of evil, China seems to be the center spoke. China has proven that neither freedom nor democracy are necessary to become a world power. Rather, its unchecked success has given totalitarian dictatorships like Iran and North Korea the daring to assert their nuclear ambitions boldly, as Ahmadinejad did the other day at the UN.

The world is looking to China to exert a positive influence on the violent, dictatorial governments with which it has ties; yet violence and repression are not uncommon in China itself. “Birds of a feather” may be trite, but it is apt. We need to wake up to the fact that China does not promote stability and peace – if anything, it encourages war.

Hard to tell whether they are indeed doing a good or a bad job of it.

South Africa has once again demonstrated that it stands “shoulder to shoulder” (as South African Minister of intelligence Ronnie Kasrils once put it in respect to South Africa’s Zimbabwe policy) with tyrants and dictators. Last week the African bloc and the African Union, both of which South Africa is a prominent member, proposed that the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) remove its human rights monitor from Sudan.

This is to be a reward for Sudan’s ‘good behavior’. As the Egyptian envoy Ihab Gamaleldin, speaking on behalf of the council's African bloc put it, the "positive developments" in Darfur, "the marked improvement of the situation on the ground," and "the strong political will of the government of Sudan." Propaganda ala Joseph Goebbels.

UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer responded by explaining that "removing outside scrutiny is what the killers in Kharotum want". And as he points out, the sad thing is that the council is likely to oblige. In June this year the council agreed to eliminate the experts who reported on abuses in Cuba and Belarus, and placed the remaining ten country monitors on the chopping block, to be "reviewed" going forward. South Africa has shamefully supported all of these moves.

The most disturbing part of this whole affair is the silence within this country. South Africa’s behavior at the UN is hardly ever covered by the mainstream media. We should be holding protests outside the Union Building calling on the government to live up to the principles enshrined in our constitution. By doing nothing, we too, like the government, are aiding and abetting the genocide in Darfur.

http://supernatural.blogs.com/weblog/2007/10/darfur-watch-sa.html

http://www.un.org/webcast/unhrc/archive.asp?go=070924