In Sudan's western region of Darfur, more than 200,000 citizens have been killed, two million are homeless and thousands of women and girls have been raped. In one of the world's worst human disasters, the Arab-led Sudanese government and the Janjaweed - Arab militias allied with the Sudanese government - have engaged in genocide against non-Arabs over the past three years.

To date there have been many promises but little action by outside forces to implement peace in Darfur. Many people feel that it is time for the United Nations to send peacekeeping troops to the region without the Sudanese government's consent, while others think the United Nations should simply negotiate peace agreements. An intervention by peacekeeping troops must take place now, at all costs, to stop the atrocities in Darfur.

The majority of Darfur's 6 million citizens include African farmers and Arabic nomads who have mixed easily in the past. But over the past two decades, persistent drought has forced the Arabs to move to less desirable land, straining relations with the Africans. This caused the formation of an African rebel group, known as the Sudanese Liberation Army, which began destroying villages and killing government soldiers. Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir reacted by calling on local tribes to crush the rebellion, initiating the formation of an Arab nomad group. Not only did this group attack Sudanese Liberation Army members but also innocent civilians. In consequence, the Janjaweed (Arabic for "horse and gun") receives backing from the Sudanese government to support the ethnic cleansing of all Sudanese Africans.

With the destruction of homes and villages, the Janjaweed have caused over 2 million Darfuris to flee to refugee camps. Recently, U.N. aid agencies made a statement warning that the relief keeping millions alive cannot be sustained much longer.

In May 2006, the Sudanese Liberation Army and Sudanese government signed a peace treaty, promising to disarm the Janjaweed. This promise has still not been fulfilled, and it appears that the crisis in Darfur has actually worsened since the agreement. Founded in 2002, the African Union, a group of 53 African countries, also tried to help by gradually sending 7,000 troops to Darfur, but the force was not strong enough to successfully help the large number of victims. Given these failures, Darfur is in need of new outside peacekeeping initiatives immediately.

The United Nations recently proposed sending 22,500 peacekeepers to the Darfur region, but currently there's a standstill. Al-Bashir does not want any U.N. forces deployed to Sudan and insists on troop control. The United Nations insists on waiting for his permission to take action, though such permission is arguably not required.

The question remains of who should lead an estimated $1.4 to $1.6 billion peacekeeping intervention into Darfur? It's likely that many countries would need to finance the intervention. Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Canada have said they are each willing to send several hundred troops. But again, who will lead?

While the America could co-lead an intervention, its forces are already in Iraq and Afghanistan. France already has troops in neighboring Chad and has significant regional business and oil interests to protect. Great Britain is historically tied to 20th century leadership of African countries for economic interests as well. Sudan's acceptance of an African Union peacekeeping proposal is possible, but the AU is not well-funded.

Sudan's nine neighbors (Egypt, Libya, Chad, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Congo, Central African Republic and Uganda) should play a role, even if it is only in border protection and repelling Janjaweed advances. Because it shares the largest border with Sudan's Darfur region, Chad should be most involved with an intervention because Sudan's problems are now becoming its own.

Finally, any peacekeeping intervention should be accomplished without necessarily imposing a government structure - not even democracy - on the Sudanese. Those involved, including America, should instead focus solely on stopping the genocide. Trying to impose democracy can get in the way of ending the atrocities because democracy may be seen as a selfish capitalist move for economic gain.

It is our duty as human beings to force an immediate troop intervention in Darfur. While America should have a significant role in this, it should not lead, leaving that to African Union and United Nations forces. The main purpose is to stop the atrocities without enforcing democracy. We must come together and fight for the lives of the people of Darfur by acting now.

Kirsten Schohl is an LSA freshman. This viewpoint is a modified version of a paper for a class.