Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : TLM.TSE Talisman Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tomas who wrote (671)	12/17/1999 9:20:00 PM
From: Tomas	Respond to of 1713

Who wants peace, who wants war? Uganda-Sudan Peace Deal Angers US The East African Daily, December 16 Uganda-Sudan Peace Deal Angers US Kampala - Hard-liners in the US State Department are displeased with former President Jimmy Carter's role in brokering last week's peace agreement between Uganda and Sudan. Their disgruntlement stems partly from the timing of the December 8 announcement in Nairobi that the longtime adversaries will normalise relations. Some Clinton administration officials are upset that Mr. Carter's unanticipated success occurred at the same time that the American Ambassador to the UN, Richard Holbrooke, was carrying out his own diplomatic mission to Central Africa. The Uganda-Sudan agreement not only deflected attention from the Clinton administration's latest high-profile Africa foray, it also served as an embarrassing contrast to the Clinton administration's continued inability to lend substance to its rhetoric about peacemaking in Africa. The prospect of a Sudan-Uganda rapprochement is especially disturbing to the faction in Washington's Africa policy-making circles that wants to destabilise and ultimately topple the Islamist regime in Khartoum. Uganda is seen an indispensable ally in this effort. If President Yoweri Museveni makes good on his pledge to stop aiding the Sudan Peoples Liberation Army, the US-backed insurgents will be unable to sustain their military pressure on Khartoum. Just a couple of days prior to his peacemaking triumph, Carter himself had pointed to Washington's use of the SPLA as a weapon against Sudan's rulers. "The people in Sudan want to resolve the conflict," Mr. Carter declared in an interview published in the December 8 Boston Globe. "The biggest obstacle is US government policy. The US is committed to overthrowing the government in Khartoum. Any sort of peace effort is aborted, basically by the policies of the US." Speaking in Mozambique at the conclusion of his election-monitoring mission there, Carter went on to denounce legislation recently signed by Mr. Clinton that would allow US food shipments to be sent directly to the SPLA. Carter called the measure "a devastating obstacle to any furtherance of peace." The Assistant Secretary of State for refugees and humanitarian affairs, Julia Taft, said the authorisation of such a programme by Mr. Clinton would mark "a departure from the way we should be using food aid." Ms Taft made the comments in a recent New York Times article. Such uncommon public dissent on the part of a high-level official signals that a ferocious debate about the Sudan issue is taking place inside the Clinton administration. Senior American officials said to be in favour of a more militant US stance toward Sudan include Susan Rice, Assistant Secretary of State for African affairs, and Gayle Smith, Africa Director at the National Security Council.