Reflections on Genocide

There has been a lot of talk on my campus about the situation in Sudan and the role America should be playing. It's nice to hear that peace talks are progressing, but many will remain skeptical until there's evidence that the situation is actually changing. So discussion continues, and my desire for America to solve the situation with military action remains, but I'm pretty sure that desire is borne of a peculiarly American mix of fantasy and ignorance of how the world works. Let me explain.

I know I'm not alone in the pride I feel for America's Armed Forces. I know they did their best in Somalia, despite having their mission handicapped by Washington (Rumsfeld isn't the first to deploy our troops ill-equipped). It's therefore natural for a civilian to feel that saving hundreds of thousands of lives from brutality is a reasonable mission to give our military. However, that knee-jerk reaction, the desire to bring justice to evil-doers, despite being motivated by the best of intentions, could very well create an even greater disaster than the one already underway in Sudan. What are American troops going to do when they arrive in Darfur? What will the militia groups do? Might it be possible that the militias will ratchet up the violence to show their strength? Are we going to ask our soldiers to simply defend civilians or will they hunt the militia groups? What effect will invading an African nation have on the rest of the world? Are we ready to officially be the world's police force? Are we going to topple the government of Sudan? If not, how do we know the violence won't resume once we leave? Are we going to replace the government? With what? Where will we get the troops to send to Sudan? Will they come from our force in Iraq? Would that undermine the work we've already accomplished there?

I think Americans want desparately to believe the lie continually perpetrated by President Bush, that America is in the business of bringing freedom to the oppressed. We want to beleive that we were justified in invading Iraq because we were taking out a brutal dictator. But what gives us the right to invade another nation? Why do we think we have the right to take an action like that?

I think the answer is that we understand what it is to be free, and we assume that others share a desire for the freedom democracy can bring. I think that belief is one Americans need to recognize as fundamentally flawed. For example, when given the opportunity to vote, who did Iraq's Sunnis overwhelmingly vote for? A cleric-led government! Bush and all of America have been deluded by a FANTASY. Islam is not JUST a religion. The Koran depicts the ideal government as being an Islamic one. It's true that there are many different variations on what that means, but even at its most benign, it involves the repression of women. Allow me to put it bluntly: Muslims do not want to be free. Not in the way Americans understand the word. Any attempt to bring "freedom" to a foreign country that doesn't share a liberal Western heritage is doomed to fail.

Sudan brings a whole other set of issues into the equation. In Africa, we have to deal with post-colonial governments. Americans do not understand how much the legacy of colonialism has warped the cultures it's come into contact with. The evils done by the European powers on the continent of Africa are still reverbarating today. The nations responsible for the situation in Darfur need to be held accountable for their pasts. As Americans, we'd like to believe that we have the power to go in and make things better, but there is no evidence that our military could effect any positive change. If it were as simple as going in, killing the militias, and getting out, there's no doubt that we should do it immediately. I'm afraid that's not an accurate assessment of the scope of the mission necessary, however.

A friend mentioned an idea to directly engage China. His plan is to ask China to enforce sanctions against Sudan. We would offer to replace whatever amount of oil they usually buy from the Sudanese with our own supplies. The theory is that the sanctions would starve the government of funds, making it impossible for them to afford any more Russian kalashnikovs. While an imaginative idea, I find it difficult to imagine being politically viable. Americans are already spending a ridiculous amount to fund a war that was intended to supply us with more oil, but instead are dealing with all time high prices for petroleum. Sharing our already constrained supply with the Chinese in order to save some Africans doesn't sound like something many politicians could get behind.

I'm beginning to believe that the ethical issues Americans are faced with regarding this current genocide need to be part of a larger discussion Americans should be having. There are millions of innocent men, women, and children around the world living in fear. Many do desire freedom, but have no chance at ever tasting it. Every American directly supports the regimes responsible for this oppression through our lifestyle. We buy goods from China and the Middle East. We are culpable. Add to that our country's previous transgressions, having installed and supported dictatorships in order to protect our own interests, and you have an international situation that is complex and misunderstood.

Americans treasure our freedom, so we find it difficult to fathom how it could be possible others don't share our enthusiasm. The simple answer is that our freedoms are not free. Others pay a cost for the way we live our lives. Many Americans espouse personal responsibility as a core American virtue. Before we attempt to take the spec out of our neighbor's eye, perhaps we should take the plank out of our own so we can see what the fuck we're doing.

Tags:
Sudan, Darfur, Genocide, Foreign Policy, Politics, China, Middle East, Islam, Muslims, Human Rights