SUDAN: When nine government landcruisers mounted with 12.7mm canon swept through their simple wattle and daub homes, the villagers of Tawilla knew that the African Union soldiers stationed nearby would do nothing to intervene.
So they ran from their homes and streamed up to the gates of the AU base a few hundred metres away where they hoped the 241 Rwandan troops would not turn them away.
They didn't.
After a tense standoff, the government of Sudan soldiers gave up and went home. But not before they had killed four people in the village and burned dozens of simple homes. They fired rocket propelled grenades into four small camps for displaced people arrayed around the village.
Four people died and dozens more were injured. Since that attack at the end of September, the village and the relief camps have emptied.
Instead hundreds of families have built flimsy lean-tos around the perimeter of the AU base.
By day they return to the village to cook or feed animals. At night they hunker down beneath the floodlights of the base.
They explain that here an attack on their homes would constitute an attack on the AU, and force the Rwandan soldiers to intervene.
Fatima Mohamed Adam brought her five children to live in the shadow of the military base.
"We came here because of what happened before. Our house had been burned and we had nowhere to live," she says. "We have no confidence now in the government but we believe that being near the African Union we will be safe."
It is a graphic illustration of the tension between villagers who look to the AU soldiers for protection, and an armed force hamstrung by resources and mandate.
With violence in Darfur spiralling out of control once again, the debate over the international community's response to the slaughter in Sudan's western region has resumed.
Some 2½ years ago rebels took up arms against an Arab government it said neglected their needs. Khartoum responded by unleashing Arab militias known as the Janjaweed on communities suspected of supporting rebel gunmen.
Since then, two million people have been forced to flee their homes and an estimated 180,000 have died. The AU deployed its African Union Mission in Sudan last year partly in response to UN calls for an "African response for an African problem".
They were sent primarily to monitor a ceasefire signed by rebels and government officials in neighbouring Chad.
In addition, their mandate included a clause allowing them to protect civilians "under imminent threat and in the immediate vicinity, within resources and capability".
Fifteen months after they arrived, Darfur is in flames again. Humanitarian agencies are confined to El Geneina in west Darfur where banditry makes the roads impassable.
In north Darfur, thousands of people have been forced from their villages in recent weeks as the Janjaweed and government troops flex their muscles. And the African Union has itself become one of the targets.
Five Nigerian soldiers and two civilian contractors were killed as they tried to intervene in an attack last month. Senior officers say morale is low. "We came here to monitor and now we find ourselves ducking bullets," said one. "Morale is down.
"It has got worse in the past two months as it seems the warring parties no longer recognise us. You don't know if the day will end with your life intact."
Their concerns are matched by international observers. Human rights watchdogs and aid agencies warn that the African Union has made little impact on the deteriorating situation, hampered by a lack of resources and a mandate that limits its troops from protecting civilians.
"With the recent upsurge in violence over the past two months, that African Union's shortcomings have come into full focus," said a report published this week by the New York-based Refugees International.
"The AU is hobbled by a weak mandate, too few weapons and fewer than 7,000 troops to cover an area the size of Texas." Much of the problem, according to Refugees International, is that donor governments have failed to provide adequate support for the AU mission and that the Sudanese government places "innumerable obstacles in its path".
Some 105 armoured personnel carriers donated by the Canadian government have spent months caught up in Sudanese red tape, for example.
Nicki Bennett, spokeswoman for Oxfam in Sudan, said an increase in strength to 12,300 soldiers - recommended earlier this year by the AU itself - was crucial to prevent the insecurity that was holding up humanitarian work.
"The African Union Mission in Sudan is at a critical turning point: if it does not receive the financial and logistical means to fully implement its mandate and take its troops to their full strength, the international community is setting the AU up for failure and turning its back on Darfur," she said.
Ambassador Baba Kingibe, the AU special representative in Sudan, said he was disappointed that the African troops had been unable to prevent a slide into further violence.
"What we can do in Darfur depends on the co-operation and willingness of the parties to the conflict. If they decide not to abide by their commitment then there is a limit to what we can do, given our mandate and given our means," he said.
"We regret that the IDP camps which are supposed to be safe havens are becoming less secure." But he added that the Sudanese government had finally cleared the Canadian armoured vehicles, which are due to be deployed this week. And he hinted that the mandate could be strengthened when it is due for review on December 20th.
That will be too late for some.
Walk around any camp crammed with people forced to flee their homes and there is only disappointment at the AU's role.
Abaka Hasan Abdullah, who finds himself living in Zam Zam, a sprawling camp of more than 30,000 people, speaks for many when he says the AU is simply not doing enough.
"There are international soldiers here but the attacks still come," he says. "The AU just writes reports. We would like to see them shooting the Janjaweed and protecting us properly."