
While at the conference one subject that kept resurfacing was what counts as genocide and whether or not the current crisis in Darfur should be considered a genocide. For my part I'm convinced on the issue per my interpretation of the Convention. In fact, I could care less what you call the current crisis in Darfur, so long as you agree that the situation is dire and something should be done about it. If the stories of women being gang raped daily do not strike a chord with you; if this picture of a little girl hit by a bullet does not make your stomach twinge in anger; if you are not swayed by hearing about those who barely escape their villages as government Antonov aircraft attack; if it does not bother you that some 2.5 million are internally displaced in Darfur; if after all this you are not moved to tears, or better yet, to action, then I don't know what to say. After all, what use is there in crying over spilt blood (or milk for that matter) if you don't do anything about it. The people of Darfur have no need of your sympathy lest it compel you to action on their behalf.
As for "Never Again," it's catchy, I suppose, but therein lies its problem. Whenever we've uttered those words the implication is that it has already happened again. "Never again" is rendered useless by those who say it and invest no energy into it. Those on whose behalf it is said depend on those of us who have the power to stop genocide when we see threats of it today to breathe life into these too often used words. Sure, it's nice to have it on a t-shirt or on your laptop or clipped to your bag. However, it must not remain simply a slogan but MUST become a credo. Perhaps there's a curse on "never again." All I know is that ever since we've uttered it after the Holocaust, after Bosnia, and after Rwanda it's been too late. There is some value in the phrase, however; the power lies in the charge the phrase entrusts to humanity and is a hope for the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment