Mid-East Peace Conference

A Middle East peace conference regarding the extended conflict between Israelis and the Palestinians will be launched in this coming month, December 12 in Annapolis, Maryland. The two leaders, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and the Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas had agreed to engage in negotiation. This negotiation is expected to lead the two sides to come to an agreement before the end of 2008. It is certainly a very important chance for these two neighbors to discuss all the outstanding issues that have been dividing their territory. The question is: Will all the citizens of both countries agree on the future output of this conference? For instance, Mahmoud Abbas stated, “East Jerusalem should be the capital of the New Palestinian state.” This statement has created tension to most of the Israelis attention, who regard Jerusalem “as part of their capital.” Neither Israelis nor Palestinians are willing to give up something that they feel they have connection with. This conference will be an enormous task for the leaders of both countries, Israel and Palestine.

Evil Education

For a long time I was not able to comprehend people who could not admit past events that to me seemed historical. For example, my two Turkish friends differ in a fundamental way: the other one acknowledges the Armenian genocide, and the other one does not. I have always had a really hard time understanding the friend who does not recognize the events of the 1910’s as a genocide, because to me, according to what I have been taught, it is clear as day and night what the acts should be called. However, I read an article awhile back that discusses the issue and talked with my friends, and it really made me think about the topic a lot more and realize that the situation really is not as simple as I might have presumed it to be; maybe there is a reason, other than just ignorance, why it is still so hard for my friend to admit the Armenian genocide. I have come to realize that this reason might be education. School and what is taught in it play a big role in building and reforming one’s believes. I bet you still remember when you were taught that the Nazi Germans were bad, and that Albert Einstein was a great man. More importantly, to this date, you have probably not even thought of questioning these statements. But, did you know that Einstein cheated on his wife and was commonly known as a “ladies’ man?” I am sure you did not, because contradicting what you have learnt at an early age is challenging and almost impossible for most of the people; as it must be for Turks with the Armenian genocide. That is why it is important for people to be critical in not only what they are taught, but also what they have been taught before. As a Finn, for instance, I can look back to my elementary education and see if something I took as the ultimate truth was actually biased. Maybe Russia was discussed in a too bad light in my history classes? Maybe the national heroes were not really that amazing and all-in-all fine people?

Whether it is positive or negative, the environment we grew in has had a significant impact on all of us. It is time to realize the huge effect education has on people, and insist changes in it rather than judge people influenced by it.

Death Toll

Possibly the sadest aspect of seeing people's lack of willingness to help is when we see news sources, who are supposed to be our link to what is happening in the world, burying the topic so heavily that when ten people die, it doesn't even make the list of highlights on CNN's list of highlights on their opening page. Has death truly become so monotonous? Or is it just that we've been hearing about death for so long in the region that it's no longer surprising or newsworthy? After all several stories are featured that reveal a much lower death toll, 8 People killed by a typhoon in the Philippines, One person shot to death as the result of a noise complaint, and many other examples. Maybe we have just become too accustomed to death continuing to plague Darfur that hearing about one more event that ended the lives of multiple people, no longer does any good.

China in Darfur

The article in the Contra Costa Times deals with the involvement of China in Darfur. Amit Arora, the writer of the article says that the continuation of the genocide in Darfur is mainly due to the actions of China. Presently, China is the biggest importer of oil from Sudan. To be more specific, 60 percent of the oil yield in Sudan is imported by China. It thus, provides the Sudanese government with the necessary capital to fuel their genocide. The incoming money is used by the government of Sudan to buy weapons. The most astonishing fact is that most of the weapons used in Sudan are from China., which had been bought before the genocide and, Chinese weapons are still being funneled into Darfur. This is still going on, violating the arms embargo of the UN. China should be made aware of its actions and their consequences by the international community. They should be made to stop such financial agreements with Sudan, at least until the end of the genocide. The international community should voice their concern over China’s role in the genocide and do something about it.

Islamic Threat Rising

Are we in the midst of the beginning of a potential genocide? In the Middle East, the Islamic fundamentalists are steadily rising. A Fundamentalist is "a political individual" in search of a "more original Islam." Islamic fundamentalism has replaced communism as the today’s enemy. Their mission is to kill all "infidels" in defense of Islam. The fundamentalists will stop at nothing to accomplish their goals. An increase in funding and personnel can lead to larger and more destructive terrorist acts. If they gain more followers what will the world be facing? Some scholars argue that the United States must shift its focus from trying to crush radical Islamic movements militarily to pursing policies that discourage their development. Other scholars concur that U.S. policy is aggravating rather than minimizing conflict with Islamic extremism. Across the board it is agreed that something must be done about this rising threat.

Justice At Last

Although it is quite rare to see powerful dictators actually put on trial after their regime loses power of whatever region they were oppressing, it does happen occasionally and Monday Cambodia received the justice it's been hoping for since the late 1970s when the brutal regime of the Khmer Rouge brutalized its' citizens. On Monday Leng Sary, the brother in law of famed dictator Pol Pot and his wife were arrested and delivered to a special tribunal of Cambodian and foreign judges initiated to punnish former Khmer Rouge members for the atrocities they commited against the Cambodian people. Although it's taken years to finally happen, it's never too late for justice and responsibility.

What is a Terrorist?

How do u define a terrorist? One man’s terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. For example, Al Qaeda attacked America because they feel America is trying to destroy Islam so they feel like they are acting in self-defense. However we just see it as terrorism. In the movie, paradise now we saw how the other side views terrorist acts. The friends viewed there killing as “God’s Will” and a way to fight against oppression they felt. Their goal was of more than just killing people they wanted to send a message. This movie gave me some insight into how a terrorist thinks. Terrorist organizations aren’t brutal men only out to kill. They are doing what they believe is the only way to fight against oppression.

A Different Type of Victim

It is hard enough to try to get the average citizen interested in helping citizens of other countries living in poverty or worse, but the struggle takes on an entirely new meaning when something along the lines of what the article Losing Faith in Charity: Is There Any Hope For NGO's talks about. In the region of Chad, where the tragedy struck, even major organizations such as UNICEF, and the Red Cross were unable to prevent such an event from taking place. Although this is a region that is plagued with much worse, the events that took place this week that left these children used and abandoned is nothing to be made light of and deserves our careful consideration as we consder what kind of world we live in where this is not the worse possible situation for a child.

Diffusion and dispalcement of responsibility

The diffusion and displacement of responsibility for actions is what has been plaguing us, and also, is responsible for countless deaths.

Soldiers are puppets to the higher authoritative powers. They are voiceless and follow orders no matter how repulsive they maybe. The system is set up in such a way that soldiers, even if they are against their orders, can do nothing about its. The punishments range from court marshals to even death, depending on the country. So they follow the orders and commit heinous acts no matter what. The only way to justify their actions is to say that some higher power commanded them to do so. The higher power has the authority to say that some even higher power ordered him to do so. So, the blame and responsibility is diffused till it no longer exists.

The lack of responsibility by its displacement even leads to an increase in inhumane acts as people simply follow what they are told to do. This is where the group mentality comes into play. They are a part of a group and the group is responsible for their actions. The group, in turn is commanded by higher ranking officials, and so forth. So, responsibility is simply diffused and people don’t get the sense of personal involvement.

Define terrorism - Easier said than done

The first chapter of "Understanding Terrorism" discusses the definition of terrorism. Much like genocide, it is difficult to draw the line of terrorism. But what makes it so difficult? Each nation or group has a different history of terrorism. Past events that are considered acts of terrorism pose as pictures and models for the future. Also, each group or nation has a very different culture from another on the other side of the world. In the United States, we consider suicide unacceptable. Some cultures use suicide as a weapon. They are brought up to believe that this is an acceptable and worth while act. One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter.

Enemy

Enemy. One who feels hatred toward, intends injury to, or opposes the interests of another. In times of war, it is easier to think of the enemy as a faceless group instead of a person just like us. This is made easier through the use of political cartoons. Artists play into the harshest stereotypes, which makes it easier for us to accept these clichés. These stereotypes only further divide nations. Instead of trying to hate the opposition we should work towards understanding each other.

What should we be doing?

When dealing with Genocide why are we so reluctant to take action even when alternative solutions appear to be failing miserably. An article on CNN.com from Sunday showed us that what the world needs is not peace talks but action. According to the AU envoy, "the process leading to negotiations has begun," and yet how is this possibly going to effect change if the first scheduled "peace talk" does not enjoy the presence of the rebel leaders? UN mediator Jan Eliasson claims that "the real substantial negotiations will start when the parties are prepared," and yet how can we guarantee that rebel groups will ever be "prepared," more importantly what are we doing in the meantime so that when they fail to show up for another "peace talk" action is taken?

Punishments needed to set an example

Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq (also known as Baghdad Correctional Facility) was the sight of countless acts of abuse, rape and torture of Iraqi prisoners by the US military. The amplitude of these events was magnified to the world do to a massive number of pictures and videos. Last year reports surfaced that the authority to commit such acts had come from high up. In November 2006, the former US Army Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, in-charge of Abu Ghraib prison, told Spain's El Pais newspaper she had seen a letter apparently signed by Donald Rumsfeld which allowed civilian contractors to use techniques such as sleep deprivation during interrogation. How can we make sure that these events don’t happen again? The first thing that should have happened is recognition that these acts were too obscene to commit. A line was crossed and someone needed to step up and say something. Another step that needs to be taken is harsher punishment for those involved. Very few soldiers were punished for these acts and no high up powers were held accountable. The leaders should be punished not only to set an example, but because it is morally right.

The Killing Fields: His Version

We had a speaker on campus who was a survivor of the killing fields. He talked to us about his experiences when he was there and how he got through the years and the totalitarian rule of the Khmer Rouge.

He started off the session with a brief summary of the events that led to the uprising of the Khmer Rouge and the Cambodian genocide. Then, he followed up by sharing his experiences: how he would go to school always having the fear that American B-52 bombers might bomb his part of town, how he had the fear that he would not see his parents after returning from school. After the Khmer Rouge got power, he was taken to a concentration camp, and he described the long walks as horrible and too much for anyone to comprehend. Patients were taken out of their beds and made to walk, children died on the road, women gave birth in the middle of the road. And when they finally reached the concentration camps, they were forced into labour and given only a handful of rice daily. Most people died there because of malnutrition. But, the main reason for death was the Khmer Rouge troops. They killed because they didn’t like the person, or because the person was working slow. They had total power there and as a consequence,the genocide went on for 4 years.

The shocking thing I found out from his talk was that the genocide quelled because the North Vietnamese came into Cambodia and fought against the Khmer Rouge. The world had known of this genocide, which had been going on for four years and the whole world simply ignored it. The U.N. had vowed “never again” to any genocide. Still, they did nothing.

When the speaker finally fled from the concentration camp and reached neighboring Thailand, he saw signs of the international community in the form of UNHCR camps.

If the UN had taken quick action to stop the genocide, it would definitely had been stopped. The Cambodian genocide can be taken as a correlation to the Darfur genocide going on right now, in our time. The international community did not give its full attention to Cambodia, so countless lives were lost from the human society. In the present context, we all are aware of the genocide in Darfur. Even if the Sudanese government does not want negotiations to end the genocide, every effort, every resource should be utilized to save lives there no matter what, even if it means deploying the UN troops and sweeping out the current inhumane Sudanese government.

Terrorism: the means to a political ends

While to most Americans, the anniversary of September 11th is a time for remembrance and charity. For George Bush and the White House, it is a day of justification: justification of the war in Iraq, justification for the deficit the country has been plunged into funding the war, and justification for all of the laws which have restricted civil liberties in the past years (such as the patriot act).


This should be a time of grieving and support. Rather than giving help to those in need, and taking a hand in the lives of our nations people, the government would rather use the events of 9/11 to further its stake in the middle east, to draw more support for its war mongering, and to concoct more justifications for why its treating its own citizens as enemies.

The Stanford prison experiment and Abu Ghraib

A parallel can be drawn between the Stanford Prison Experiment and the issue of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib prison. The Stanford Prison Experiment shows that in isolated constitutions, the ones in charge show their dominance over the captives. This process can lead to brutal and often inhumane acts being perpetrated on the captives.

The Stanford Prison experiment shows evidence of this. The guards show their superiority by forcing the prisoners to do push ups, by throwing them in isolation bins, and even by setting up a reward system in which, the most compliant person got to sleep on a proper bed. All these acts convey to the prisoners that they are inferior. These acts give the guards the feeling and the ego that they are definitely in control and dominant over the prisoners.

Basically, in Abu Ghraib, what the soldiers were doing, was showing their dominance and superiority over the prisoners. The notion that they were in control gave them the power and will to commit the horrific acts. One more factor that helped to aggravate the situation was the agreement of Donald Rumsfeld. He gave permission to use harsh interrogation techniques in the prison. I believe that the lack of fear of consequence and the necessity to portray their dominance led to the horrific acts at Abu Ghraib prison.

Forgotten the Golden Rule?

“While this is still the right position, it is not the right time.”
This is what a conservative Republican representative Mike Pence from Indiana said regarding the House vote for the use of the word ‘genocide’. Pence’s statement not only surprised me, but also made me frustrated; how can someone say that it is right, but not allow it to be done? Pence refers to the announcement that Turkey made, which says that Turkey will stop assisting the United States to transport war equipment and cargo to Iraq. Moreover, George W. Bush gave a warning to the House to approve the use of the term genocide. According to the article in which Mr. Pence made his statement, approximately 70 percent of all air cargo, and around 30 percent of fuel sent to Iraq goes through Turkey. Hence, it is clear that Turkey is important for the United States in terms of military. However, personally I still believe that it is important that the U.S recognizes the genocide, regardless of Turkey’s opinion or announcements. Why would the U.S. not want to call the acts of 1910’s genocide if the only opposing aspect is that Turkey is a military ally with the U.S? I find it absurd that the U.S. can believe in something, in this case referring to the acts as genocide, but still not do it because of military benefits. Didn’t the Golden Rule go

”Treat others as you would like to be treated?”

Effectiveness of Current Information

It is a commonly accepted fact that Darfur is still a region plagued by violence, death, and genocide, so why is the only current information on the Genocide about American Soldiers who have died as a result of the conflict. On websites like BBC NEWS, information about the Janjaweed and political aspect of the genocide is several years old, PBS is more current, including articles on their website that is only slightly over a year and half old. If we are trying to bring about a generation that works for change, how are we supposed to do this when we do not have access to current information and are unable to educate ourselves?

Steps After Genocide

Yes, most have the world has realized that genocide is something we should avoid. That it is morally wrong.
Now the problem is what to do after genocide is stopped. When cleaning up the messes of genocide who is held responsible? Do we look at individuals? Or, do we focus on the entire group?
Throughout the history of genocide, it is known that some of those that committed the acts have gotten away. The world has the challenge of deciding who to hold responsible. Is it correct to try individuals that were just taking orders? We can't possibly know if those people had a choice. It might have been their life or follow orders.
Equally difficult is the challenge of holding an entire government or group responsible. Do you focus on the leaders, the masterminds? We have to figure out if they had enough control that they basically brainwashed people. Or, come to the conclusion that their followers decided to act on their own.
Everything does not instantly become easy once genocide is stopped.

Responsibilities in Iraq

Many of the problems which the US has faced in the struggles in the Middle east have come from a lack of planning. What has taken these situations and made the unmanageable is that no one is willing to to take responsibility for what has happened.

While responsibility has been dodged from the lowest levels to the very highest in the US occupation of Iraq, the most recent example comes from the company Blackwater, a private security company which offers protection and safe travels to American civilians in the middle east.

In this instance, these private security workers opened fire, unprovoked, wounding 27 Iraqis, and killing 17. The company Blackwater, despite having mass media remark on the unprovoked shootings, issued official statements saying that the security workers were shooting in response to enemy fire, and only in self defense. Time and time again, in both the political and extra political workers of the US government, our nations greatest problems have come due to the shirking of responsiblities and avoidance of being blamed.

Time for a Response

The article Reign Of Terror was written in 2004, but relates just as much today as it did then. It commends the government for recognizing the events in Darfur as genocide, but it points out that not everything is being done to stop the problem. Sadly, the same events have been occurring for years in Darfur and nothing is being done. Many activist groups are making their voice heard and telling of possible solutions to the problem. It is up to the leaders of the world's countries to turn up the heat on Sudan and finally stop this genocide. As far as teh U.S. is concerned, Citizens for Global Solutions recommends the following four steps for U.S. foreign policy in Darfur:

The U.S. must secure increased funding for a stronger AMIS force to protect the people of Darfur until a U.N. force can deploy. The international community must act on its recognized “responsibility to protect” the people of Darfur.

The U.S. must engage Sudan’s closest allies -- especially China -- to end the violence in Darfur. With its economic relationship with the Sudan and its oil interests in the region, China is especially well-positioned to play a crucial role in ending genocide.

The U.S. should support the International Criminal Court’s investigation in Darfur. In order to bring justice for the people of Darfur, the U.S. should support the ICC’s case and supply any relevant information on the Darfur case in order to hold accountable those responsible for genocide and crimes against humanity.

The U.S. should take more forceful measures to stop genocide. Stronger measures could include planning for a no-fly zone, enforcing targeted individual sanctions, targeted divestment (specifically from the petroleum sector) and a freeze of off-shore accounts of Sudanese officials.

Action must be taken so that no more lives are lost in this Genocide.

Our drugs - their medicine

I read an article in the New York Times about the dilemma of narcotics: the rich countries are full of medical and entertaining narcotics, whilst the poor countries that are in a big need of them, do not have enough. In places like Uganda, thousands of cancer and AIDS victims are suffering severe pain, because no narcotics are available. On the other hand, narcotics used for entertainment, such as opium and heroin, are produced in these poor countries for the demanding consumers in the rich countries. I guess my main point is to inform people about this ironic situation that the rich people are using the poor countries’ narcotics for entertainment, while the narcotics should be used in the poor countries for their citizens. Just a brief look at the NYT’s map, shows the misallocation of the narcotics. How can more of the narcotics be in countries where they are not needed as much? Whether it is the sense of “otherness” or something else that makes people in rich countries use these drugs for amusement, I think it is important to really prioritize the use of narcotics in the world.

Zimbardo Connections

The zimbardo study was revolutionary in its ability to reproduce the captor-inmate relationship and to model the behavior of the victims and the individuals with power.

It could be expected that the students posing as prison guards would adopt the mindset of enforcement. What is so shocking about the findings of the Zimbardo study is the speed at which the students adopted their roles in the prison and the obedience/ zeal which the students showed in their respective positions.

Im scared because the study makes it seem like in any situation, where there is an approving authority figure (the prison superintendent) people will attempt to do anything. As seen in Abu Ghraib, soldiers were willing to perform acts which clearly were of an evil nature, which were precisely prohibited in the Geneva conventions. Against their understanding of right and wrong, these soldiers went through with torturing numerous inmates, without provocation and illegally.

Not just in the books...

This blog entry is a bit off topic from the whole genocide issue. Regardless, it deals with blind prejudice. I am upset and disgusted by what I am witnessing.

At this very moment, I am sitting in Ogilvie Station in downtown Chicago. For whatever reason, I always sit in the same spot when I wait for this train. I know what track it always leaves on and I know what time it departs for I take it very often. I sat down to do some homework and an African-American, man approached me. I would guess this gentleman is in his mid-twenties. He very kindly asked me which train was departing from the track that I was seated most near. I, also kindly, responded. He also asked if I knew where the men’s restroom was located. He thanked me generously after my replies and went on his way.

About ten minutes later I saw him walk across the station and sit. His position was also near the track and still in my plain view. A security guard approached him. The guard asked him where he was planning to go so late on a Sunday night. He asked the young man to empty his pockets, show him identification, and provide proof that he paid for a ticket to ride this train. I was near enough to hear all of the conversation and yet the guard did not approach me, a Caucasian student typing on her laptop.

A woman walked past him. He looked up, smiled, and said hello. After looking him right in the eye, she blankly looked straight ahead, quickened her pace, clutched her purse more tightly, and spoke no words back to him.

I’m watching people in this station judge this gentleman based on his race. They are treating him as though he is a threat. They do not see him as an individual but rather a black man who fits into a category with all other black men. The judgment, otherness, and categorizing that we’ve been talking about in class is happening before my eyes.

What next?

As awful as it is to admit, articles about Genocide and Mass Killings are a fairly frequent occurrence in today's newspapers. Although these are a common sight they are still vital to the education of modern society and still hard to stomach, however I discovered a new low of mass killings when on CNN.com I encountered an article about rebels in the Congo attacking a wildlife habitat that houses endangered mountain Gorillas. Throughout the last several weeks of our class we have been discussing what type of person participates in mass killing, reading this article made me wonder, what would posses someone to participate in the mass killings of animals? And if they are simply victims of a conflict zone then why are rebels taking the time to kill the animals "execution style" or for that matter why bother breaking in more than once to kill them? How is it that the next phase of executing innocent bystanders is gorillas?

Imagery as propaganda

Imagery is an an effective means of altering and eventually dictating the perception of people. So, it has been used in the form of propaganda in all the wars by all the factions. They have been used to portray the enemy as a separate non-human entity and on the other hand, they have been used to rouse the sense of belonging to a group.

The general subjects of the images could be categorized as, “us vs. them”, “we are good and they are evil”, “we are honest and they are liars”, and “we are heroes and they are villains”. This distances the two factions and changes the core moral values of the people involved. The enemy is portrayed as a non-human force by dehumanizing and demonizing them and portraying them as rats, monsters, madmen, etc. Thus, the audience has the feeling that the other group is less than human and should be crushed without thought and without guilt.

Thus, imagery is used to numb the people and turning them from human beings to killing machines.

International Crimes Punished by Court

Genocide means any acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. While attempts to destroy groups have been very much a part of human history, it has been either a description of the action or a very general concept, such as massacres or mass murder. It wasn’t until 1944 when Raphael Lemkin wrote, Axis Rule in Occupied Europe, which was the first public articulation of the concept of genocide. Today people still have a hard time classifying what is genocide and what is not. For example, the continuing debate about the Armenian genocide. This is why the International Criminal Court (ICC) was established in 1998. Now, genocide is an international crime for which individuals, no matter how high in authority, may be indicted, tried, and punished by the ICC.
This way nations can not hide behind that fact that a war is going on at the time to justify genocidal acts. This Court is also good because a nations laws or customs may excuse them in part for there actions. With the ICC no one can escape the brutality of there actions.

What does an enemy look like?

Enemy is a common word. Everyone knows what it means and upon mention an example will most likely enter a person's head. But, everyone has different examples. An enemy could be some fictitious character or possibly a threatening country and its people.
We watched a film by Sam Keen that looked into this. Mr. Keen researched how different countries displayed their enemies. Many of them used the same images. It appeared to be a universal opinion that certain animals were bad and somethings always represented good.
What this really shows is that countries are not that different from one another. It was very interesting when he showed images from opposing countries that had similar cartoons. There are some things that link people from all over the world together.

How do we educate the "melting pot"?

The United States is typically referred to as the “melting pot” of cultures. We are composed of so many different cultures. With the passing of time, we have only added to the diverse range of people in the United States. The question is: how can we properly and is constantly changing and gaining more people from around the world.
The United States is such a young country and with that youth comes a lack of extensive history. There are so many people with so many backgrounds. Everyone has a different story and history. World history seems to be our history because of the diverse population of our nation. Another question come up: who is to decide what is important enough to teach and what is not? How do we educate our nation on a history that includes pieces from around the world?

Turkey & EU?

I read BBC New’s online discussion on the question whether Turkey should be allowed to join the European Union or not. Surprisingly, a Cypriot from the Greek side of Cyprus, states that Turkey should be allowed to join the EU because it would help Turkey to solve its dilemmas with Cyprus and Armenia. I find this statement rather amusing since it is said that the EU members should practice freedom of speech and take care of its citizens’ civil rights. Just today I read an article of a Turkish novelist who is put on trial because a character in her latest novel refers to the deaths of Armenians in the genocide. So, why should Turkey be given a privilege of fixing its problems only after joining the EU instead of before even considering of joining? In my opinion, there is no possibility for Turkey to join the EU before recognizing the Armenian genocide. As long as the Turkish government denies the events of the 1910’s and manipulates Turkey’s citizens, there is no room for Turkey in the EU. freedom of speech is not practiced in Turkey, which Nevertheless, I think that the European Union should put its effort on fixing the problems in Turkey and fully encourage Turkey to acknowledge the genocide and pursue to heal the relationship with Armenia.

Peacekeepers need Protection Now.

As of earlier today, peacekeeping efforts have been hurt and set back by recurring attacks by rebel forces. According to Yahoo! News:

HASKANITA, Sudan - Rebel forces stormed a small African Union base in northern Darfur and killed at least 10 peacekeepers, leaving behind charred armored vehicles and bombed out barracks in an unprecedented attack on the beleaguered mission that threatened upcoming peace talks. More than 30 peacekeepers were still missing by late Sunday, indicating the death toll from the attack could rise significantly.

The Peacekeepers, internationals sent by the UN, by some standards, the warring in Sudan has already produced genocide numbers in deaths. Without a firm reinforcement to the peacekeeping troops stationed in the Sudan, there is no chance that peacekeeping talks will have any success, as implementation will be out of the question. Taking down regimes and funding unnecessary wars is to create a mockery of the work and focus that needs to be directed at these third world countries where civil war has scarred the land and destroyed the lives of an entire nation. The UN, as well as its main power the United States, must get its priorities together and send support to Sudan, where it is needed now more than ever. For the Peace.

Actions Speak Louder

These past couple of weeks, the world’s focus has centered around the country of Myanmar, what used to be known as Burma. There, peaceful activism had begun and been mainly led by the Buddhist monks in that country. Other than the military, monks are the largest majority group in Myanmar. They are also highly revered as religious leaders and are some of the most respected individuals. The military, however, has taken action against those monks as well as other protestors, shooting and killing many as well as blockading the monasteries so the monks cannot leave.
As most media is pointing out, the demonstrations are beginning to die out. Although many petitions have been started, and other groups are protesting around the world, it still doesn’t help if the military that have control over Myanmar is still blindly following orders from the leaders of that country. As this article points out, the greatest opportunity for change will only come if the younger generations of military officers begin to think for themselves and start to take action against the dictatorship.

What is newsworthy?

The situation in Darfur has received a disappointing and small amount of coverage from news organizations such as CNN, Fox News, and the New York Times in the past weeks, however this weeks' coverage has once again become plentiful with the tragic death of 10 peacekeepers when Darfur rebels attacked their base in Darfur. Although this is a very tragic event, it begs the question of why 10 people had to die for the media to continue it's coverage of a region that has no doubt seen countless deaths from within Darfur recently. The articles mentions peacekeepers that were taken and/or killed in Darfur, and although it is very important to talk about those who gave their lives trying to help, are the lives of those living in fear any less newsworthy?

The role of Distance

Genocide is based on distance. Distance from a particular group of people either physically, emotionally, or psychologically. Distance leads to the creation of the group as a separate entity altogether, as an “other”, different and segregated from one’s own. Psychological and emotional distance creates a sense of the other group being obsolete and this feeling leads to ordinary humans committing inhumane acts. The Germans took the help of cinema as propaganda, to spread the anti-Semitic feeling in their nation and to create a huge gap between Jews and Germans.

The cinemas that were shown inculcated a feeling of total pride of being German and a sense of total commitment and surrender to the third Reich. The cinemas the Reich used portrayed Hitler as god personified, as ruler of the people and capable of only doing good for his people. This played a huge part in the genocide that soon followed, by being one of the main means of providing a ground for conformity. A viewing of such movies, mainly Triumph des Willens, and Der Sieg des Glaubens portrays the group mentality of “Germans for the Germans”. The films show the people serving for their nation as kind, caring “individuals”, incapable of doing anything that will adversely affect their nation. They show Germans fighting some other entity with great courage to rouse a sense of pride, belonging and respect. When these films were shown, especially in Hitler Yuden camps, it is obvious that they created huge emotional barriers and enlarged the distance with the Jews.

Class speaker: Making genocide feel even closer

How richly do you know your history? How far back can you date your ancestors? Lake Forest College senior Martha Mekaelian spoke to our class on Wednesday about hers. I was so enthralled by her vivid knowledge of her family's past in the Armenian genocide.

Martha stated that she doesn't know all of her family's story because of the separation: able bodied men were sent to concentration camps while women and children were forced to walk the deserts in Syria. She also shared that she doesn't know any of her family's history before 1915 because only 1/3 of the Armenian population survived the genocide.

AYF-YOARF is an Armenian youth program that Martha participates in. Their goals are to unite the Armenian youth diaspora and work alongside the Armenian Revolutionary Federation. They hold protests each year, asking for their past to be recognized as a genocide.

She raised an excellent point in class: her history is never taught in American schools. Is a host nation responsible for providing the education of it's cultures? How can we teach all histories? It was evident that this was an issue that bothered her. I also found it very interesting that though Martha was born in the United States, she identifies herself as Armenian. I would call myself American from Polish descent. I found it intriguing that she does not do the same.

The Responsibility to Protect

Adam, I think, might find this particularly interesting.

While I was searching for a good news article to use for my blog post, I came upon this article discussing a document called the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine (R2P). The main theme expressed through this doctrine is that sovereign states and the international community have a responsibility to guard people from mass killing crimes (genocides and it extends to other related mass atrocity crimes as well).

To be honest, reading over this document has made me feel a little bit torn. In general I tend to identify myself as someone that would like the genocides of the world recognized. I also feel, however, that the United States should not have to take complete responsibility for saving other nations that might be in genocidal peril. The idea that we must 'act for the sake of our own humanity' (as is stated in the doctrine) made me feel as though my viewpoint was something to be ashamed of. Needless to say, the whole thing makes me pretty uncomfortable.

The doctrine points the finger at everyone sitting idly by in the face of genocide and labels them as 'inhumane'- essentially, monsters. This approach, while powerful in evoking an emotional response, is hardly the way to go about introducing legislation. All too often the cries and pleas of people calling for a stop to genocidal madness go completely ignored. In what way would simply slapping an official title on this same point of view help bring about future change? It's like putting pretty wrapping paper on a used Ipod and trying to pass it off as a shiny new birthday gift.

Sadly, while the principals of the R2P doctrine are widely accepted and acknowledged, spoken and written words are never translated into actions. (Or if there are actions, they are often meek and not nearly to the effect that is required by the doctrine that was accepted.) To recruit a sovereign nation even halfheartedly into something remotely like R2P, the world needs to put a different spin on the old ideas. (Maybe something less accusing, for a change.)

And those are my two cents.

Where’s The Line?

At what point does warfare killings cross the line from what is necessary to Genocide. Many countries have tried to use the excuse of necessary war tactics to justify mass killings. In the case of the Armenian Genocide , Most Turks say Armenians died during wartime fighting and that the killings were necessary because the Armenians sympathized with and many fought on the side of the enemy. Of course during a war killings will happen, but we must step back and look at the manner in which these people were killed. In under no circumstances is it okay to torture, rape or mass kill people. I believe that self-defense should be the main reason for killing another during battle. A soldier should never kill another person just because of what nationality, race, or gender they are. Moreover, it is the job of the leader to make it clear that it is not the identity of the group to mass kill. In the case of the Armenian Genocide, the Turks can’t be allowed to get away with their cover-up. They are the perfect example that there is a limit to wartime brutalities. Genocidal acts are being repeated today in the Darfur region of Africa. As the number of fatalities rise, the line between right and wrong gets blurred.

Disuse of power

A genocide did indeed occur in the period from 1915 to 1918 in Armenia by the hands of the Ottoman Turks. This is the entire truth and no political issues or circumstantial evidences or any other explanations can change it. All Turkish regimes, from 1915 till present have done so, and the rest of the world has not been able to do anything, but stand by as normal by-standards. Even the UN has not been able to touch this subject with much success. This denial issue has arisen quite recently and more prominently, due to Turkey’s want to enroll as a permanent member of the European Union. The French government, a prominent member of the EU, has passed a law stating that the denial of the Armenian genocide is punishable by law and anyone convicted of this denial can be sentenced to prison. Armenia, on the other hand, has tried to rally countries into registering the events which started from 1915 as “genocidal”.

The United Nations, the prominent figure in international politics and international relations, according to the 1948 genocide convention law, has deemed the massacre a genocide. What I do not get is why there is still dispute over “if a genocide did indeed occur.” To me, this situation makes no sense at all. If a higher authoritative power, with the inclusion of most of the countries of the world, has proved that the event was a genocide then shouldn’t the decision be absolute? Turkey has denied the claims as it cannot afford to call it a genocide. I look upon this as a failure of the UN to enforce its stature in the international community. There is still confusion around even after the UN has given its decision. The French are denying Turkey admission into the EU until they face their past and own up to their deeds. This would not have been the issue if the UN had made a strong statement regarding the judgment of the genocide of 1915. The UN, the organization responsible to stop wars, to stop genocides, has not been able to enforce its own decision. Then, how can it stop any acts of evil?

Buyers Beware: Understanding the Media Feed.

All too often we are presented misleading information by the media. From possible terror threats, to training child prodigies, to linking drinking wine with curing heart disease, media sources are constantly falsely representing and misconstruing unscientific findings as falsifiable fact.

Even the most ridiculous articles are able to find their way to what should be trustworthy sources. Of course, it is necessary for every individual to be self sufficient in selecting and scrutinizing the information which is present in front of them, in order for a democracy to successfully operate. In this way; truthful sources must be sorted from skewed sources.

So, be cautious in what you read and see on TV, because there is always an agenda present, there are always alterior motives behind what gets edited, printed, taped, and presented. The difference between ignorance and knowledge is in understanding and being conscious of the information one ingests.

Forgive a killer?

Reading in the book by James Waller, Becoming Evil: How Ordinary People Commit Genocide and Mass Killing, one idea stood out to me. He says in the book that many people don’t want to study the “evil” of genocide and the ordinary people that commit it because by understanding, you run the risk of forgiving those so-called “evil” people.
The reason it stood out to me was because, from an early age, we are taught to forgive. Whether it’s a kid at school who called you a bad name or your sibling who wouldn’t let you play with a toy, if it became a big deal there was always some mediation of “Okay, now say you’re sorry,” and in response to the apology you’d forgive and at least be civil towards one another for a short time. Now I realize the enormous difference between not sharing a toy and brutally killing people, but “keeping the peace” is a natural human response, it provides cohesion within the group. As Waller points out, how else could all the soldiers fighting for Nazi Germany be able to integrate back into society? That same need for cohesion also brings out another necessary and mature quality, empathy. But how are you supposed to empathize with a person who could kill so easily?
The study that Waller brings up as an example to how people are taught to empathize is Arthur G. Miller’s experiment. It pointed out that people were more apt to understand, or at least be less judgmental, towards perpetrators of an offense after the offense was explained to them. Waller also points out that we explain things in order to make our actions justifiable, but in the end everyone is responsible of their own actions.
Whether people decide to forgive or not, there is still reason to hear the other side out. I think that understanding why people could do so much harm, maybe even how we as a society could just accept those people again, no questions asked, is something that deserves further thought.

The Media: What is their responsibility?

Media coverage of international events is essential to informing the American people. This can be applied to many different topics, more specifically genocide. The awareness of genocide is something that is in complete control of the media. Without media coverage, information would be extremely difficult to find. The average American will not go in search of information on genocide. Therefore, it must be given to them and this is a large responsibility.

With this responsibility comes discretion. There are a lot of issues involving genocide, but very few articles published. To prove my point, I looked at four prominent online newspapers. This list included: The Star Tribune, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, and The Washington Post. I searched under “genocide” for the past week and here were my results. There was anywhere between three to five articles on each source.

So where does this put the media? There is a very difficult position for them. They are responsible for informing the public about many different events, which requires a balance of various events. Which leads me to another question, where does their responsibility end and ours begin? Should the American public also be responsible for their awareness, because is it not fair to put that burden on the shoulders of the media?

Weapons For Peace?

The New York Times article I read, talks about how The United Nations Security Council unanimously approved to send up to 26,000 peacekeepers to Darfur and how now the Sudanese government is hesitating with getting non-African troops. As I was reading the article, I started thinking if this really is the way to go; do more soldiers in a country facing a genocide truly help the situation? Are soldiers the real weapon for peace? How about diplomacy, negotiation, and consultation? Has the situation in Darfur really gone so far that there is nothing we can do without more armed forces and guns?
I would like to think that there is always something we can do, that there is always a way for diplomacy to solve conflicts. Unfortunately, though, I feel that there are some conflicts in the world that are not feasible to solve without any forces, or at least without a detrimental amount of humanitarian loss. On the other hand, I think that negotiation and diplomacy should not be put aside when trying to solve conflicts. Military forces such as peacekeepers should strongly cooperate with diplomats, and maybe then we can bring global conflicts like Darfur and Israel-Palestine to an end. The real weapons for peace are not guns, but well trained peacekeepers together with negotiators and consulates.

Where's The Conscience?

Where’s ones conscience in committing genocide. In class we talked about the evolution of the Super-ego , or more simply your conscience. How does this innate reaction not stop people from slaughtering other people?
Freud argues that people develop and Id, Ego, and Superego. The Id is the impulse of want; the superego is societies expectations and your conscience, while the ego is rational behavior.
In an article published by the Ohio State Journal, Joanna Montgomery Byles states: “Freud wrote of the conflict 'between the soldier's old peaceful ego and his new warlike one' becoming acute as soon as the peace-ego realizes what danger it runs in losing its own life to the rashness of its newly formed parasitic double'. Accepting the violence that is within ourselves as well as in the other, the so-called enemy is a difficult lesson to learn, and learning to displace our instinctual destructive aggression peacefully is enormously more difficult. To the extent the individual superego is connected to society, which assumes its functions particularly in wartime, the problem of war brings into focus the psychoanalytic problem of the partial diffusion (separation) of Eros and psychic aggression brought about by war through specifically social processes.” She is simply commenting on how ones superego will change in times of war or in other situational hardships.
But what about those who are heading the genocide? Their superegos are so severely warped that they don’t even no the difference between right and wrong. Society needs to stand up against these killers and make it known that mass murders are not right and will not be accepted.

What is the news supposed to do?

We rely on human relief organizations to educate us as well as to provide us with a way to reach out to those in need so why is it that websites like UNHCR provide us only with information on how many victims there are so far. It is understandable that these organizations need money in order to be able to continue to help those in need but how much good does it really do when a relief website tells us only of the work they do and not the people they help or the causes they are currently involved in. As casey so intuitively pointed out, websites like cnn.com offer mostly information on upcomming political elections and nowhere on the front page does it mention issues like Darfur.

Schools For Schools

Invisible Children is an international non-profit organization in the United States dedicated to bettering the economy of northern Uganda. The people in this small piece of the world have seen torture, starvation, and constant effects of war for the past 21 years. Because this war has lasted so long, total counts for civilian deaths reach as high as current Darfur and Cambodian numbers. Also, because this war has lasted so long, not many people realize the overall effects of this slow, mass killing process.

Schools for Schools is one of their programs working to build responsibilities and education in the minds of Ugandan children. Invisible Children gains its support through the minds of United States and international students by getting them directly involved. These schools raise money and awareness and then ship their proceeds to northern Ugandan schools. The program attempts to find the already academically stimulated institutions of northern Uganda and raise their performance even more so. The goal is to raise the education standards of northern Uganda to the level of the rest of the country. This is done by providing the proper facilities and educators necessary to make leaders and independent thinkers in the northern Ugandan society.

Just How True is Our Information?

Depending on which news source you access, you're always bound to get different results. The Boston Globe, for example, might highlight some of the better aspects of Obama's campaign. Whereas other sources, such as Fox News, will trail another particular candidate a little more closely. These differences in what the media chooses to portray and how it portrays it extends much further than simple domestic measures, however.

For example, on close examination of CNN.com I found that there wasn't a single article that referred to Darfur as 'genocide'. In fact, there weren't even two pages worth of information on Darfur. The most I was able to find was a Student News learning activity on the "crisis" in Darfur. In comparison to sites such as Save Darfur, which boldly proclaim the "crisis" as genocide on the very front page, Cnn is disappointment.

This bias in the media, which is almost always overlooked, leads you to wonder: what else are we glossing over? What else aren't we hearing about? And most importantly: why aren't we hearing about these important events? Certainly the mass murder in Sudan is newsworthy.

Who has the power over these networks to constrict the information that is given to the public?

"First They Killed My Father:..."

In my previous English class last year, we discussed about the genocide in Cambodia during 1975-1979. I was amazed by the fact that over 700,000 men of Khmer Rouge guerrilla movement, under Pol Pot’s command had caused the death of approximately 2 million Cambodians.

A book with title “First They Killed My Father: A Daughter of Cambodia Remembers,” was written by Loung Ung, a Cambodian genocide survivor. The author wrote about her life prior to Khmer Rouge and how her families, friends and she had been affected from the three years of the massacre. After having read the book, I have acquired more knowledge about the genocide in Cambodia. If you are interested to know more about the Cambodian genocide, I recommend you to read this book.

One of the most difficult things about getting people involved in human relief is getting them to see that what is happening is affecting real people, so make places like Darfur and Rwanda about the faces and not about the facts. Newspapers have a duty to their readers to be informative and unbiased but there are other venues with which we are able to take full advantage while trying to advocate particular causes that allow a more personal approach and yet often provide us with the same detatched "updates" as the local newspapers. Why not utilize magazine space, and websites to provide us with personal anecdotes from regions currently frought with terror in order to show, rather than tell, us why it is that our help is so desperately needed. Websites like the Holocaust museum show us that these were actually people who deserve our time and energy and who can tell us more than any statistic.

Send In The Troops

The United Nations passed a resolution in the Fall of 2006 to send UN troops into Darfur in order to assist the African Union troops in appeasing the acts of genocide. But they were not deployed. The reason behind it is shocking and totally incongruous to the entire situation. The deployment of the troops was brought to a standstill for the simple reason that the Sudanese government did not express its consent. It did not want UN troops disrupting their calculated torture and slaughter of innocents. And the shocking thing is that their discontent to the troops actually has prevented the troops for entering into Sudan.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide has stated that the UN can take appropriate actions to prevent and stop genocide. What I do not get is why the UN needs the consent of the Sudanese government, which by the way is responsible for slaughtering its own people, to stop the genocide. The obvious response to the United Nation’s proposal by the Sudanese government would have been negative. I believe that the genocide in Darfur is still going on because of this minor problem. This failure has shown to the Janjaweed and the Sudanese government that the UN is weaker and taken the element of fear out. There is no international pressure as they know that they have the upper hand. This absence of fear, I believe, has led to the continual of genocide in Darfur. The Sudanese government has nothing to fear, nothing to govern it, so it is continuing to slaughter thousands.

If the UN gets its troops into Darfur, it will definitely bring a sense of security to the general people and will bring fear in the Janjaweed and ultimately, the Sudanese government. The first step in stopping the Genocide should have been the deployment of troops in Darfur. This would have shown the Sudanese government that the international community does know and care about what is going on in Darfur and they don’t like it and they’ll do whatever it takes to stop it. Instead, the failure of this action has shown the inferiority of the UN and the superiority of the Sudanese government.

It is never too late to get troops into Darfur and stop the genocide. This is the most powerful step that can be taken.

Vacation in Rwanda?

Last week I wrote about Khartum, the capital of Sudan, and how it is growing economically every day. Happily, it is not only Khartoum that has been able to forget the horrors of genocide and move ahead on its own path, but also the country of Rwanda. As in Khartoum, big international corporations like Serena hotels have found Rwanda and are building hotels around the country. One of the main tourist attractions of Rwanda is the Lake Kivu and every year more and more people come and spend time at its beautiful coast. (see picture). Nowadays, tourism has become so big that it makes up appr. 40 % of Rwanda's GDP.

Khartoum and Rwanda could be seen as guiding examples of places that can still keep going regardless of horrifying events. I believe so, at least to a certain extent. Maybe Khartoum and Rwanda are not perfect examples of economic growth or a raise in standard of living, but no one can argue that there has not been trying. The fact that hotels are build in both Khartoum and Rwanda, shows that people living in these places are trying to move towards a better direction.

Whilst many terrible acts are taking place around the world at this very minute, people should always try to seek something better. At a time of crisis it can be hard to look for development, but as time goes by people should remember to stand up again and help each other out. For instance, Rwanda is already moving to a lot better direction only after a decade after the catastrophic genocide. The Rwandan example gives people hope of something better and helps them to move on, which all the people reading about these terrible events should remember. If the local people are ready to move on, so should the rest of the world be.

1.5 Million Die. I Am Friends With A Survivor.

About three years ago, a Cambodian girl named Sam transfered to my high school. Sam was instantly loved by all who met her. She manages to smile and laugh at any possible situation. Sam is a genuine friend with the most positive outlook on life. Perhaps this intense optimism stems from a sincere amount of appreciation. I recently learned that Sam's family was greatly affected by the Cambodian genocide in the late 1970s.

The Khmer Rouge was a Communist Party of Kampuchea (CPK) spin-off power. Khmer Rouge's objective in Cambodia was to recreate. This new society was intended to feed off of peasants and farmers. Cambodian's were forced to slave in rice fields (which came to be known as "killing fields") in order to produce Khmer Rouge's demands. Keep in mind that these were newly settled city folk who were relocated to the countrysides. They were inadequate in the fields and slaughtered by the thousands. Overall, 1.5 million Cambodians were killed. In the fields, they died of exhaustion, starvation, and disease.

Sam's senior research paper was about her family in Cambodia. Sam's mother, parents, and siblings were swept up in the displacement. I do not know much details to their story, but I do know that her mother was forced to work in the "killing fields" as a very young teenager. Her father (Sam's grandfather) was taken away and never seen again.

Warped Perspectives

One of the questions posed to us during class was: How could people bring themselves take the lives of innocent people during genocide? There were just normal citizens and they committed the horrific acts of genocide. The beginnings of this question can be answered in through the various studies throughout history such as the Asch, Milgram, Zimbardo and Sherif experiments.
Each of the experiments explains a small portion of the larger, general question. The Asch study tested the social pressure to conform, the Milgram experiment tested the obedience of subjects, Zimbardo tested the correlation between environments of subjects and their actions, and Sherif tested the effects of various leadership styles. Collectively, they can be used to analyze the psychology behind genocide.
After looking at each study and how each apply to genocide, it is almost frightening to see how easily people can be manipulated. All it takes is the right combination of groups with predetermined answers, uniforms, the correct environment/set up, and the right leadership to start your own genocide.

Psychiatric Terror

Psychiatric Terror: using false psychiatric diagnoses to manipulate and control political dissidents, was used by the Soviets, among others. In closed nations, where the government does not tolerate any political opposition, and the civil rights of individuals are ignored, the government is liable to treat its citizens in any way it sees fit.

In the Soviet Union, an individual suspected of conspiring against the government could be labeled as mentally ill, then could be institutionalized indefinitely. This is an abomination to the most basic rights of people. By eliminating a person's right to freely express themselves, in an effort to silence political dissension, the dehumanization which takes place borders on the level achieved in a systematic genocide. The trouble with genocide as it is defined, is that it only applies to the mass killings of a race or ethnicity. If a mass killing takes place based on political beliefs, the genocide convention cannot be applied, as it currently reads.

Also, even if the Russian government didn't necessarily 'pull the lever', it sought to remove an entire group of people from its nation. Individuals who were diagnosed with mental disorders, due to their political beliefs, were sent for years, perhaps decades to mental hospitals, or sent to work camps out in siberia. Either way, these people almost never made it out alive, and the genocide conventions need to take these other scenerios into consideration in defining what a genocide is.

Time to Help

After the Holocaust one would think that the world learned its lesson and would never let something like that happen again. However, today over 50 years later we see Genocide occurring in Sudan. The people need to start getting educated now and keep forming organizations such as STAND . Hopefully this time the world learns its lesson that genocide needs to be fought against and stopped.
But is forming awareness groups and raising money really all we can do to help? Our fellow man is being oppressed and murdered. It is not our job to turn the other cheek; we must do something because obviously the citizens of Darfur can’t help themselves. I personally believe that our focuses should be aiding Darfur’s government and not in the Middle East. How many more lives will be lost before other nations step in to relieve Darfur of this problem?

Finish the Job

In review of the “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide” and its “Adopted Resolution 260,” and “The Rome Statute,” I believe we have the power to do more than we have accomplished thus far.

First of all, the following excerpts are taken from Article III and Article VIII of “Adopted Resolution 260:”

“Article VIII: Any Contracting Party may call upon the competent organs
of the United Nations to take such action under the Charter of the United
Nations as they consider appropriate for the prevention and suppression of
acts of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III."


“Article III: The following acts shall be punishable:
(a) Genocide;
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide;
(e) Complicity in genocide.”


Basically, what I gained after reading these two passages was that any country, “contracting party,” associated with this document can call for an investigation into the “prevention and suppression” by the Charter of the United Nations.

America authorized this treaty December 11th 1948. I then began to think to myself about Sudan and the Darfur region and what has been done to initiate an investigation via this “adopted resolution?” This is where everything became interesting:

• Sudan ratified the treaty October 13th, 2003, legitimizing a UN sanctioned search.
  
• “On February 27, 2007, the Office of the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court applied to the Pre-Trial Chamber I for summonses to appear against Ahmad Muhammad Harun, Sudan’s former Minister of State for the Interior, and Ali Kushayb, a Janjaweed leader in West Darfur, according to ASIL Insight:The Situation in Darfur.
  
• Even though a peace treaty and a ceasefire agreement were signed, neither side abided by their settlements.
  
• “The Application submitted by the Prosecutor alleges that Harun and Kushayb are criminally responsible for 51 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity” (ASIL).
  
• “The Sudanese government has made clear that it has no intention of cooperating with the ICC regarding Harun and Kushayb. Indeed, its Interior Minister, Al-Zubayr Bashir Taha, has publicly threatened to behead anyone who attempts to arrest a Sudanese official on behalf of the Court” (ASIL).

The current administration has deemed the actions in Darfur genocide. Preemptive actions have taken place through the ICC to control and counterstrike the actions of Harun and Kushayb, yet because Taha, one man, won’t allow for these two men to stand trial, millions of Darfurians have no one to hold accountable for these crimes against humanity. Are our hands tied or can we continue to fight for those who can’t?

America is Not the Only Nation Responding Slowly!

In Uganda, peace talks between the Ugandan government and the insurgent Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) aren't exactly moving quickly. Granted, these discussions take a lot of time for government officials to process and really talk out, but slow responses in the face of a violent conflict can be deadly.

Recent arguments have even been reportedly incomplete and indecisive.

It isn't just America, but many other nations that are slow to address problems occurring in even their own states. This is a problem stretching beyond people in position to help being slow to take action.

The Man Behind "Genocide"

People rarely look into the creation of a word. We use words like genocide without knowing there origin. The class was assigned reading in Samantha Power's book A Problem From Hell and learned about the story behind such a powerful word. Power wrote a great overview of the word and it's creator Raphael Lemkin.

Lemkin led an interesting and sad life. He was able to predict the awful crimes that the Nazis would commit but no one would listen to him. Most of his family would later die because of there Jewish beliefs. This pushed Lemkin in to work.

After the Holocaust Lemkin took Churchill's words to heart. Lemkin began the search for a word. He was able to come up with a term for the crime but couldn't get officials to recognize it or it's meaning. He worked non-stop for several years until it was accepted.

Lemkin played a huge role in the genocide law of today.

title

Darfur, genocide, STAND, Samantha Powers

Exempting out

Alright maybe I am just being cruel, heartless, and dismissing it as someone else’s problems, but I do not necessarily agree with always being the banker, the politician, and the police for other countries. Maybe if we adopted a more isolationist ideology regarding foreign policy, we would develop a better rapport with other countries because we wouldn’t be involved in all aspects of their government.


Some people believe that the current administration has made a mockery of the executive branch and that we can barely handle finances and policy in our own country. With this in mind, how can we judge or police other parts of the world? With our current economic state resembling a roller coaster ride it would be safe to say that more attention should be directed to stabilizing our own economy before handling all other countries problematic situations.


I am not saying that we shouldn’t take action in Darfur, or any other pre-genocide/genocide declared area, but throwing American tax dollars at situations is the escape goat for Americans who would rather send money than American forces.


Protest, donate money, but the only realistic solution for the problem is cutting the red tape of the American government and stepping on the toes of the other countries to remove those in power in Sudan.


Until then we should sit back and solve our own problems before we decide we are most adept to solve the worlds.

Khartoum - Africa’s Dubai?

This is how the capital of Sudan, Khartoum, is referred to in BBC News’ article Khartoum booms as Darfur burns by Joseph Winter. The article talks about new investments in Khartoum made by foreign investors. Many foreign investors build massive hotel complexes in Khartoum, such as the Al-Mogran project, that will directly generate 40,000 permanent jobs. Moreover, according to the IMF (International Monetary Fund), the Sudanese economy will grow by 11% this year. While the capital Khartoum’s skyline is changing and creating new jobs, approximately 2000 people die in Darfur everyday.
This great distinction between the modernizing capital and the horrifying acts taking place in Darfur, makes one think whether it is morally correct that one part of a country is enjoying a boosting economy, whilst another part of the country is facing the horrors of a genocide. Is this dual morality acceptable? It can be argued that the entire country of Sudan should be concentrating on Darfur and allocating all the resources there. However, I think that it is important for a country like Sudan, to have an economic growth in order to help its citizens. “Although economic growth is hardly a panacea, it is a necessary condition, though not sufficient, to reduce poverty in extremely poor countries.” write Draper and Ramsay in their book the Good Society, emphasizing the importance of an economic growth. Nevertheless, Sudan as well as other countries should make a stop to the terrifying acts taking place in Darfur. As much as I think that Sudan should seek economic growth, the value of human life is not, or will never be, in any way comparable to any kind of economic growth.

Genocide Awareness

Genocide awareness is a major international problem. Many people are unable to comprehend that type of inhumane act and therefore it ceases to exist in their everyday conscience. It is difficult to grasp how people can live in a world where there is so much destruction and killing. Part of this blindness is our lack of awareness.
There are two parts to unawareness, not having access to information and not bothering to find out. It is ridiculously easy for people in the United States to write off the horrendous events that are happening throughout the world for a very simple reason: It doesn’t affect them.
I know from personal experience this oblivious mindset. Up until last winter, I had never heard of Darfur or the problems occurring there. It shocked me to discover that Darfur is the first time in history that a conflict has been labeled under genocide while still going on. This labeling marks the beginning of better awareness in the United States and across the world.
Sadly, this labeling of the events in Darfur is not enough to put an end to this genocide. It has been two years since President Bush declared Darfur genocide, yet it is still occurring. Awareness is not the only factor in preventing genocide.

How effective?

Why is educating people not enough? In a time when students of both the highschool and college level are being criticized for supporting a cause they don't understand, wouldn't it be a better use of our time to help make information more readily available? With organizations like STAND, why is awareness so hard to promote? And why are people donating money to a cause they know little or nothing about? Although I am referring specifically to the situation in Darfur, the level of awareness has undeniably been both a problem and an asset in almost ever single genocide that has taken place in the last century. One of the single most similarities that has taken place in these genocides is that governments did nothing until everyday citizens started noticing and publicly discussing the lack of action on the part of a government. So why not spend more time raising awareness as well as the level of discussion and promote fundraisers as a secondary prevention?

They feel helpless...but you shouldn't

Western Darfur is home to certain rebel groups identified as African and Muslim. Therefore, the Sudanese government (claimed Arab) has removed nearly 2,500,000 ordinary African and Muslim civilians from their villages and properties.

A similar story: Carl dates three girls over the course of two years. All three relationships have ended because the girl has cheated on Carl. Carl then decides that all women are the same and he begins to steal from them, burn their homes down, and murder them.

Does this make sense to you?

Don't feel helpless because Darfur is so far from your everyday life. Become one of many who is attempting to right the world with human rights organizations. Raise awareness in our community. A team of runners is doing just that in Washington D.C. to raise money and save lives. Tell UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to urge a "peacekeeping force" by signing an online petition. Simple acts will not go unnoticed.

When the rest of the world recognizes the severity of Darfur's situation, we can begin to right the wrong. It's evident that this mass killing is not just and the more people that know about it, the more we can do to help. Past the stage of prevention, it is now time to intervene.

We Are One

To belong to a group and to be accepted, is the greatest desire we all have. Through out human history, this basic human desire has proved to be devastative. All the wars that have been fought, all the genocides that have ever occurred, involved normal human beings who were turned into mere puppets, incapable of individual thoughts and actions.

The experiments done by Asch and Milgram show that individuals in a focused group conform to the thoughts and the mentality of the entire group, even if they may have conflicting viewpoints. When people are part of a group, for example, of an armed militia, they portray the group and not they themselves as individuals. The judgment of the people involved isn’t changed. What is changed is their perception of a situation. They see the situation through the eyes of the group, not their own. So, all their acts are justified and ratified. That is why even normal people perform inhuman acts. Even the heinous act of killing another human being is justified and even glorious. Their own death is considered a rightly deserved prize of credit and martyrdom. The thoughts they portray, the actions they perform are not their own but of their group.

The main question is “how are normal people capable of doing such heinous acts?” The answer to that is their “collective group mentality” and the social pressure they face. These factors mould them as a part of a group and their individuality and their idiosyncrasies are lost. So, they are part of a group, they are the group, not individuals. The justification of all their actions by distribution of guilt or even absence of it has fuelled all the acts of death and destruction and is responsible for them.