Brian Steidle, a former United States Marine captain, spent six months beginning in the autumn of 2004 in Darfur working as a monitor for the African Union. Armed with nothing but his camera, Steidle witnessed the unspeakable human barbarism. He returned to America to expose the atrocities to a nation hitherto left in the dark but a nation that had said never again to genocide.

His story has been captured in the documentary ‘The Devil Came on Horseback’. This week Steidle himself showed the film at the Gisozi Memorial Site.

Steidle was convinced that if the world could only see what was going on, there would be American troops in Darfur "within a week”. Hadn’t the world learnt its lesson in Rwanda? More than three years later, the violence continues in Darfur and those troops are yet to arrive.

However, at present a UN compound is being swiftly erected on the outskirts of the region’s capital, el-Fasher. Eventually, it is hoped that the base for the UN’s African Mission in Darfur (UNAMID) will house the largest peacekeeping force in the world: 20,000 soldiers, and about 6,000 policemen.

Is the world finally acting? Belatedly perhaps, but is the international community sticking by its promise of ‘never again’?

Since Steidle’s time in Darfur the conflict has become significantly more complex. What began as two main rebel groups fighting government troops and their janjaweed militias has dissolved into a tangle of many more groups and spread into neighbouring Chad.
Realistically is the new UN peacekeeping force in with a chance?

The West’s aid-giving governments, which are paying for most of the operation, are pinning their faith on a spine of experienced Western staff officers to make the force more active and effective. At the insistence of Sudan, its composition is still 97 per cent African, but the hope is that the small non-African contingent, which is mostly Asian, can make a big difference.

However, it is unlikely that there will be major developments any time soon. The main problem lies with the Sudanese government who seems determined to press on with its military campaign, especially in the west against the JEM and Chad’s President Déby. With lots of oil money to fund their own operations and those of their proxies, the Sudanese forces see no reason to let up yet.

The UN will not be able to deter military activity on such a scale, at any rate not for quite a while. For the present its force is based largely on what it has inherited from the AU, whose soldiers had become thoroughly demoralised under the AU’s command. They had not been paid for months and 22 of them were killed last year.

So while the force is well equipped (contrary to some reports), soldiers are reluctant to put themselves on the line, preferring to stick to safer tasks. Before getting started, commanders need to rally the troops and boost morale.

And there are promises of more men. An Egyptian battalion is expected next, followed by Ethiopian and Senegalese ones. Tanzanians, Ghanaians and Burundians are also expected to join the force. More than 100 Chinese engineers are already operating in Nyala.
However, there are fears that this is simply too little too late and Sudan is set for several more years of painful conflict.

The Rwandan audience at the film showing, unsurprisingly due to their failure here in 1994, expressed a dismal lack of confidence in the UN. But what are the options?

Brian Chalk, a genocide scholar and guest speaker at the film viewing, spoke of arming Sudanese rebels so that they could defend themselves against the government. This, he believes, would prove that the international community is serious about helping Darfuris.
But when the number of rebel groups is multiplying and when each group has different motives, it would be impossible to know who to arm and to be sure that they would act responsibly. This option is fanciful at best, terrifying at worst.

A long-term solution depends on peace talks between the rebels and the government. These broke down after an abortive conference in Libya last October. Again a major obstacle is the splintering of the rebels into a confusion of factions, often for reasons of personal rivalry.

And if rebels have become little more than opportunists, peace may not be a priority. But in a conflict that has dragged on for so long, it seems that if the UN can provide some security on the ground talk of peace might hold some meaning.

After several years of advocacy, Steidle remains committed to his fight to stamp out genocide and urges us all as individuals to put pressure on our leaders, who in turn will lean harder on the UN.

So while the UN is unlikely to secure peace any time soon, there is hope that it may be able to foster an environment in which peace is at least itself an option.
Ends