Too few, too late?

Even if UN forces are at last let into Darfur, will they be able to save it?
economist
AFTER months of huffy hesitation and evasion, Sudan's government at last agreed this week to let some 3,000 UN peacekeepers, replete with helicopter gunships, into its ravaged western region of Darfur. The UN's blue helmets are to bolster an ineffectual force of 7,000 troops now on the ground under the aegis of the African Union (AU). The UN's secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon, says he hopes the Sudanese government in Khartoum may yet allow the peacekeeping mission to be beefed up a lot more, bringing its strength up to 22,000 soldiers and police under a “hybrid” UN and AU command. But Sudan's president, Omar al-Bashir, shows no sign of agreeing to such an increase.
EPA On the move, again, in Darfur

This week's deal will have no immediate impact on the misery in Darfur, where at least 200,000 have been killed and 2m displaced since 2003 in fighting that has ranged over scrubland the size of France. But it is a start. If a small but robust UN force proves more effective, pressure may grow on Mr Bashir to let in a bigger force.

A key factor in persuading him to relent was an apparent change in the attitude of China, which had hitherto prevented any real pressure being put on Sudan; most of Sudan's oil goes to China, which provides Sudan's government with most of its arms and much of its sorely needed investment in infrastructure. The Chinese government may have been rattled by a campaign launched in America calling for a boycott of next year's Beijing Olympic Games and dubbing them “the Genocide Olympics”.

China has blithely ignored accusations that it is indirectly to blame for letting the Darfur carnage continue. But when the Olympics are brought into the equation, it becomes twitchier. A letter to China's authorities from Steven Spielberg, the American film director, urging them to help alleviate the suffering in Darfur may have forced the issue. Mr Spielberg is advising on the Olympic ceremonies, heralded as China's coming-out party. He may have feared being labelled a hard-hearted propagandist, much as Leni Riefenstahl was damned for her photographic choreography of the Nazis' Berlin Olympics of 1936.

Whether or not his letter had an effect, China's president, Hu Jintao, promptly sent a senior official to Sudan—and a deal was struck. No one is confident that Mr Bashir will stick to it. He has often wriggled out of agreements before. The American administration remains particularly sceptical. Its relations with Khartoum will improve, it says, only when things in Darfur improve. President Bush said this week he would press for sterner sanctions if Sudan failed to co-operate fully. But Mr Bashir is banking on America's bark being worse than its bite, because he knows he is still valued, if only by the CIA, as an American ally in the so-called war on terror.

It is unclear, in any case, how much difference the dispatch of 3,000 UN troops to Darfur will make. For a start, they are not due to arrive until October—or later, if the Sudanese drag their feet again. It is even less certain that Mr Bashir will let the much bigger hybrid UN-AU force be built up. And even if he did, there is no knowing if it would be effective.

Few countries are willing or able to provide the right sort of troops for the job: special forces and paratroops, as well as medical units and engineers. Fewer still, apart from the United States, have the needed airlift capacity. Sudan insists that the UN force must have an African face. But few African countries have the military clout; the best are overstretched. By the by, if the AU were persuaded to bolster its force in Sudan, that would probably end any serious effort to stiffen the backbone of its under-sized force now struggling against the odds to keep the peace in Somalia's capital, Mogadishu.

Even if peacekeepers do eventually reach Darfur in meaningful force, the region may be overwhelmed by problems of nature. The recent carnage apart, the number of people and cattle has risen much faster than their ability to sustain themselves, even in peacetime. Aid agencies now feed almost half the population. Over the years, as rainfall has declined and crops have become less bountiful, a gross dependency has set in. It is uncertain whether the people of Darfur will ever be able to look after themselves again.