African Union (AU) peacekeepers are in Darfur until June 2007, after Sudan rejected plans for it to hand over to a larger, stronger UN mission.

African Union (AU) peacekeepers are in Darfur until June 2007, after Sudan rejected plans for it
to hand over to a larger, stronger UN mission.
Sudan's government and the pro-government Arab militias are accused of war crimes against the region's black African population, although the UN has stopped short of calling it genocide.
But the current force has failed to halt attacks on civilians which has led to some 2m people living in camps. Without the peacekeepers they would be even more vulnerable.
What is the problem with the current force?
This the African Union's first serious foray into peacekeeping and it has shown.
The 7,000 peacekeepers are over-stretched and have found themselves shot at and kidnapped by rebel groups. Both sides in the conflict have stopped them accessing a number of key areas - making it extremely difficult for them to investigate ceasefire violations.
When they do take place, investigations are painfully slow with both government and rebel groups required to approve them before they are sent to headquarters.
Their mandate is to protect civilians in immediate danger where possible. This is open to numerous different interpretations.
In practice there have only been a few occasions where the AU has proactively gone out to defend civilians in threat of attack.
It is not so much what the mandate is - but how well equipped they are to enforce it.
The fact that the force functions at all is largely down to the Western contractors that are used.
The US firm PAE provides all accommodation, food and maintenance while a Canadian firm sent the helicopter which operates the supply routes.
In the areas of administration which the AU takes responsibility for, such as paying staff, it struggles.
Many of the mission's staff have not been paid for three months. Not surprisingly morale is desperately low.
What is the West's position?
Western donors have not been keen to hand cash to the force as money donated through AU headquarters in Addis Ababa has not always translated into improvements in Darfur.
The longstanding position has been that it is time for a transition from an African Union to a United Nations force.
Throughout 2006 envoys and diplomats have gone to Khartoum and tried to persuade President Omar al-Bashir to accept a UN mission. He has point blank refused.
Thanks to their strong business ties with China, the Khartoum government has insulated itself from Western pressure.
Now having realised their impotence, Western thoughts have turned to a compromise.
The approach has changed from the so-called "megaphone diplomacy" to a more conciliatory approach.
US envoy Andrew Natsios made an extremely low key visit to Sudan in October.
The message he took back to Washington was that a third way had to be found - a robust force which could be deployed without President Bashir losing face.
What is Khartoum's position on strengthening the force?
Khartoum says it is happy for the AU to strengthen its mandate, increase its number of troops and receive logistical support from the United Nations, as long as it is done in consultation with the government.
About 100 UN experts are in the process of being deployed to the AU mission to help with equipment and logistics.
At present Khartoum says it is unwilling to consider troops from outside the continent which could pose a problem as the African Union is struggling to find more troops.
The UN is now offering to send a further $21m to the force, with more going in logistical support.
What is the way ahead?
Beefing up the African Union force with extra resources and equipment is the first step in a three-phased proposal by the UN to ease the crisis.
The second stage would see the UN deploy several hundred soldiers and police officers to help the AU troops.
The third step is to push for a hybrid of AU and UN peacekeepers.
African troops would get UN logistical support and there would be substantial UN involvement in the command and control of the peacekeepers.
What is being suggested is a special representative to lead the joint force appointed by the UN and the AU.
UN officials hope this will satisfy Sudan's reservations.
But the AU has now backed Sudan's position that the force should remain under African control.
Even if a deal is reached - many in the West are unconvinced that the attacks on civilians will end unless the UN takes over - and that still needs a change of heart from President Bashir.