As the EU deploys the first of 3,700 troops to Chad this week on a peacekeeping mission to protect refugees and aid workers on the border with Darfur, rebels from eastern Chad are driving toward the capital, N'Djamena. Two years ago rebels tried to overthrow President Deby, but were defeated in battles in N'Djamena.
This time around, stakes are even higher. Recently the rebels collided with a government force but did not engage them in combat. Reports indicate the rebels have taken several towns, despite bombing campaigns by the government. When full combat erupts, it will be difficult for European forces to remain neutral:

The U.N. refugee agency UNHCR withdrew most staff from the eastern town of Guereda on Thursday after five aid vehicles in the area were hijacked at gunpoint in just 72 hours.
"We can not continue to perform our activities in favour of refugees," the UNHCR said in a statement.
Chadian rebels have threatened to attack the European force if it interferes with their campaign against Deby, although European commanders have pledged not to take sides.

With tensions escalating between Chad and Sudan, as well as within each country, even minor disturbances threaten to turn into disasters. The rebels may well suffer another defeat or fade back into the countryside of Chad or Sudan. But if they begin to defeat government forces, or clash directly with European troops, the EU may find itself in a nasty predicament, forced to choose between scaling back its presence or actively fighting the rebels.
Chad has its share of problems, and its government certainly bears responsibility for some of them. But regional destabilization clearly emanates from Sudan. The longer the international community allows problems there to fester, the greater the consequences it risks, and the greater the danger of regional, even international, war becomes.
</img> </img> </img>


(Source Link)