Kudos to Sen. Corzine for using the opportunity of the highly publicized launch of the Huffington Post to raise awareness about what is going on in the Sudan:
Here are a couple of interesting facts about the Sudan. First, there
Reader Interactions
6Comments
Comments are closed.
Trackbacks
-
Balloon Juice: Genocide
Link: Genocide. Here is an excellent post with links about the situation in Darfur from Balloon Juice. I want to thank Brian at Ain’t No Bad Dude for suggesting that I give Balloon Juice a read.
GG
I completely agree that the situation in Darfur is unjust and constitutes genocide. The problem is what do you want to do about it? The Arab majority is intent on enslaving and exterminating the black minority, and they aren’t going to drop the goal just because we send troops. In effect, there must be an ultimate exit strategy, and here there really isn’t one. Unless you are willing to redraw the map of Africa, and either create a new country or fuse Darfur to Chad, you will have to maintain a large troop presence indefinitely. Right now there isn’t even international support for a temporary intervention, so how will we support a permanent one? Any such move will be decried as “neocolonialization” and there will be instability stemming from Sudan and other Arab nations. I think the best solution would be an African Union force with strong American air support, but the AU does not seem to care about the problem enough to make the major commitment needed. And as I said, if intervention is only temporary, the Sudanese government will restart its campaign at the earliest opportunity. Personally, I say create a new country and give them a defense force, but I doubt even many who oppose the genocide are willing to go so far. However anything else is just playing kick the can.
TJIT
Smuggling in arms and providing combat training to those that are being genocided in Sudan would go a long way to stopping the genocide. And this would not require a big investment in money or people by the US
GG
TJIT,
What you are describing is a standard strategy that is used around the world. The problem is that this kind of intervention is used as an excuse for the host governement to send armored forces in to fight “meddling” and “aggression” by a foreign power. I respect the intention, but it usually doesn’t work and earns the nation who tries it world condemnation for making the situation worse. My point is that these half measures won’t really accomplish anything but raise the intensity of fighting. I personally would like to see civilized nations show the courage to break off Darfur, as this is the only permanent solution that will work. Khartoum really shouldn’t have control over all that territory anyway; the southern Sudanese have been fighting for years (probably in a manner similar to which you suggested) in order to free themselves from the Muslim majority. Khartoum only signed a cease-fire so they could concentrate on attacking Darfur for a while now. I don’t know the history of Sudan, but I bet that not much maintains territorial integrity except recent tradition and a militaristic fundamentalist government. Many African nations are artificial creations of the post-colonial period, and they really don’t represent people of similar ideals or principles. Hence, it is difficult for them to work together as a nation. Sudan should just be split so that the people of southern Sudan and Darfur can live peacefully to themselves.
Kimmitt
The problem is what do you want to do about it?
Invade. Or start up an Abraham Lincoln Brigade. I’d join.
ape
JC – you ask:
“I would love to hear a compelling argument for the recent administration decision to neuter the Darfur Accountability Act”
here is an explanation:
http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?fmedia_id=10803&fcategory_desc=Under%20Reported
As to the problems of a solution: my argument has always been that the defeat of the Taliban was a essential and that the Sudan should have been next.. the opportunity cost of Iraq has been too high.
but is the US even exerting the same level of pressure on Sudan as it is on Cuba? I don’t think so.
all this crap about Saddam ‘using chemical weapons on his own people’.. Burma did it last week, not 20 years ago. The US cannot, even if it wanted to, lead a response because of Iraq – not just the perceived loss of moral authority – simply overstretch.