Monty Python’s guide to the Darfur conflict
9 August 2008
The genocide publicised by movie stars is over, says Justin Marozzi. What must now be resolved is a civil war with unlimited breakaway factions — and Hollywood cannot help
The exclusive focus on bashing the government has emboldened the rebels, encouraging them to keep up the fight and shun the negotiating table. The peace process, as a result, has collapsed. Though uncontroversial among seasoned Sudan watchers, such a view is politically incorrect in the West, where the debate has been held in the shadows of a glossy campaign long on sentiment and outrage, short on measured analysis. As Julie Flint, co-author of Darfur: A New History of a Long War, writes on the excellent blog Making Sense of Darfur, ‘In the current hyper-moralized debate over Sudan, anyone who questions Sudan’s critics risks being called an apologist for Khartoum.’
You don’t have to be a fan of Khartoum to ask whether Hollywood has got it wrong. Personally, I think the government of President Omar al Bashir stinks. I watched a Sudanese official from the infamous Humanitarian Aid Commission (HAC) respond to charges that rape has been used as official policy by saying that rape was a Western concept. HAC falls under the brief of Ahmed Harun, minister of state for humanitarian affairs. Last year, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Harun on 42 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity. In June, I listened to the straight-faced governor of North Darfur tell a visiting Security Council delegation to Al Fasher that the humanitarian situation was ‘very stable’. Never mind about the additional 150,000 refugees created in the first four months of 2008. Forget the World Food Programme having to cut by 50 per cent its food distribution to refugees because of the deteriorating security situation. It was all a Western conspiracy against Sudan.
More articles from: Justin Marozzi | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
Popular Blogger Posts
sponsored links
GASCONY
GASCONY, SW France, near Condom-en-Armagnac 13th Century stone house, 21st Century luxury for 12 in 5 en-suites. 50 acres +
BIG SAND STEEL BAND
IF YOU ARE PLANNING A CHAMPAGNE RECEPTION and looking for some light entertainment, you can now hire London's busiest steel
BOSC LEBAT, Tarn et Garonne.
BOSC LEBAT, SW France. Only 45 minutes from Toulouse Airport with daily flights from most provincial airports avoiding the horrors
Spectator Business | Apollo Magazine
Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2009 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
Jackie Bonisteel
September 7th, 2008 3:05pm Report this commentMr. Marozzi acknowledges that UNAMID desperately needs helicopters and 16000 peacekeepers. Yet, rather than suggesting means of securing these necessities, he censures the Darfur lobby for failing to recognize the increasingly complex nature of the conflict. In doing so, he risks shifting focus from the real question: what can we do today to end the suffering?
The aim of the Darfur advocacy community is to pressure those in power to do what is required to end the violence. The majority of us are fully aware that the situation is not one of “good versus evil”. At Stand Canada, our policy recommendations, which include the appointment of a Canadian special envoy to the region, reflect this understanding.
The proper definition of genocide is an academic matter, and our aim is to secure tangible change, not to engage in a scholarly debate. While I disagree with the assessment that the genocide in Darfur is over (the legal definition includes intent to destroy a group), I do not wish to become enwrapped in discussion on this point. Darfur remains in a state of emergency. Calling the crisis “highly complicated, extremely brutal, low-intensity civil war” undermines its immediacy, and provides a sense that international action would be futile. Talk about misinformation!
Those living in refugee camps, like the recently attacked Kalma, may or may not have an opinion on the definition of genocide. What they do know is that murder, destruction, rape and insecurity continue to dominate their lives. Let us focus on how to help them now, and save the semantic debates for a time when the people of Darfur are able to participate.
E Greene
September 10th, 2008 4:03pm Report this commentIt is fine and easy to criticise aspects of the Darfur campaigning. But it would be better if Justin Marozzi were transparent about what his role was in Sudan. I understand that he was working in Sudan on a short assignment for Albany Associates, a public relations firm contracted to do public communications about the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA) and the supposed Darfur-Darfur Dialogue for AMIS and then UNAMID. Put simply, during 2006-2008 Albany was contracted to sell the DPA and the idea of the Darfur-Darfur Dialogue. Albany, AMIS and UNAMID have therefore not been impartial on questions about the rebels' conduct: they and other backers of the DPA have clung to the easy but flawed opinion that the primary obstacle to peace in Darfur has been the rebels and their fractiousness. Mr Marozzi merely repeats this view in this article, rather than address more difficult questions, for example about whether it was right for so much effort to be made to sell a peace agreement that was all but dead at the outset in 2006, and which the Sudanese government did so little to implement during 2006-2008.
Back to top