China, which imports two-thirds of Sudan's oil output and is a key supplier of arms to this North African country, stands accused of placing its self-interests before global humanitarian concerns. For a country that aspires to superpower status and a place of pride in the international community, China must exert whatever influence it has over Khartoum to quickly resolve the Darfur crisis - not to prolong it.

But the international community must also share the blame for allowing the killing and raping of internally displaced Sudanese refugees, which continues to take place in Sudan's western region of Darfur where at least 200,000 people, most of them civilians, have been killed in fighting between government-backed militias known as the Janjaweed and rebels since 2003.

After the cease-fire in May of last year, the Sudanese government, under mounting international pressure, was on the verge of giving consent to the deployment of a UN-mandated international peacekeeping force of more than 17,000 battle-ready soldiers - which was to be led by the European Union - to take over from the African Union's 7,300 poorly-armed and ineffectual peacekeepers in Darfur.

But dramatic events in the world's other hot spots, including Lebanon and stand-offs over nuclear arms with North Korea and Iran, have distracted the international community and sapped its resolve to match words with concrete actions.

It doesn't help that international politics at this time is characterised by deep cynicism and widespread hypocrisy. The US is bogged down in Iraq and is being condemned for unilateralism. The US war machine has spread itself too thin and is therefore in no position to contribute to the international community's efforts to stop what already looks like genocide in Darfur. One would expect rich European nations - with their strong militaries and economic resources - to take leading roles in developing a multilateral approach through the UN system to take decisive actions to end the crisis in Darfur. As it turns out, practising what they preach has proven too inconvenient for most European countries. They would rather sit back and content themselves with sending humanitarian aid, much of which fails to reach the refugees.

That, in turn, encourages Khartoum to continue resisting the deployment of multinational forces on its soil. The problem is that without Khartoum's consent few countries will contribute to the creation of an effective international force to deal with Darfur because that could put them into direct conflict with the Janjaweed, if not the Sudanese army as well. More than a million Sudanese have been forced out of their homes not only by the fighting, but also by the systematic harassment of the Arab Janjaweed militias, which are armed by the Sudanese government. These militias storm into villages on horses and camels, killing and pillaging as they go. Entire villages have been razed, women raped and branded, and crops destroyed in a campaign that bears all the hallmarks of a deliberate policy of ethnic cleansing.

In 2004, then-UN secretary-general Kofi Annan called the situation in Darfur the world's worst humanitarian catastrophe. Yet the world has chosen to wait and see.

Meanwhile, no one is surprised to find out that the Sudanese government not only has failed to disarm Janjaweed militias and investigate complaints of atrocities committed by them in Darfur, but that they also have turned a blind eye to the despicable practice by Arab militias of using rape of women as a weapon to intimidate and humiliate their enemies. Khartoum has broken all these key promises it made to the UN time after time without having to fear consequences.

The Darfur problem, more than any other international crisis, has exposed the UN and indeed the so-called multilateral approach as the epitome of inefficiency and moral cowardice. The crisis may have outlived his predecessor, but that should not stop the new UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and the world community from trying to end it and proving their critics wrong.