Making friend with officials from Sudan....

Today I sat in a slightly warm conference room at the United Nations to hear a seminar on desertification and the threats it presents. Now, normally I am not one to seek out confrontation...but as I'm thinking about making a comment to the panel, I see a man enter the room, in a rather nice suit, and looking around he quickly sat down at the seat for the representative from Sudan. Well, I couldn't help it. I asked a question about the topic at hand, but made sure to mention "the ongoing government sponsored genocide in Darfur."

As the panel went to address my question and the others that had been asked...this man I had seen walk in quickly raised his hand and interrupted the panel, and made a brief statement saying that "the conflict in Darfur has not been called a genocide by this [the United Nations] body, so any such language should not be used."

Aside from pure outrage at this comment, I felt a sense of accomplishment. Not only did I get to call Darfur a genocide within the sacred walls of the United Nations, but I also make this guy from the mission of the Sudan angry enough to reply to my humble little comment. It is often frustrating being a witness to the action, or rather lack of action at the UN, but it is quite fun to make friends with new people.

Words of Wisdom

In the preface to Darfur Diaries: Stories of Survival, Paul Rusesabagina writes:

"'Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish; and you have fed him for a lifetime.' Yes, the refugees of Darfur need food and shelter, but more than that they need schools to teach their children; they need the means to rebuild their lives and their homes.


"To the international community, I offer this message: It is the duty and obligation of adults to teach the children to heal. The international community would be wise to help provide jobs and education for the adults and children of Darfur. It must assist in enabling the refugees of Darfur to return home and rebuild their lives, their communities, their society. Children of genocide, left to be orphans, uneducated, and jobless, will grow to be adults who will repeat the atrocities they have witnessed."

It's a simple message, and yet it forces us to consider the complexities and long-term effects of genocide. Education. Empowering youth to overcome trauma, heal communities, and build a better world.

Easier said than done. Thoughts?

NOT a boycott

As Jill Savitt and her team work to bring the Olympic dream to Darfur, they must also combat the assumption that their campaign calls for a boycott of the Olympics. It does not.

The press has latched onto the catchy idea of "Genocide Olympics" - but the challenge is that accusing China of hosting Genocide Olympics gives the country no way out. Savitt wants to set China up for success, appeal in a positive light for China to do its part to host peaceful Games. This means extending its leverage until positive results are seen on the ground in Darfur.

Jerry Fowler speaks with Jill here.

Darfour à Paris: "La communauté internationale ne peut pas continuer à rester sans rien faire"

Hey everyone, I know I've been WAY behind on blogging for quite some time now. My studies here in Paris have been rather demanding, both in and out of the classroom, absorbing what I can of the culture in such a big city. However, it's refreshing (though of course at the same time disheartening that the situation still merits worldwide attention) to hear of news about Darfur even here, where I had no idea what kind of attention the crisis was getting.

Yesterday, in Paris, a conference was held on the subject of Darfur and France's role in bringing the conflict to an end. In attendance, of course, was the new French president, M. Sarkozy, and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice as well. An article (in French for those able to read it) is posted on the website of Le Monde; of course, a translation can be found (though in garbled English, at best) of the article using online translation machines such as BabelFish.

Hope all's well!

Time to Press for Tougher Sanctions

As Elizabeth noted in her post below, Sudan has once again backtracked on its pledge to permit a UN peacekeeping force in Darfur. For the full story, see the article "Meeting on Darfur Ends with Little Visible Progress" in Monday's New York Times.

This intransigence, by now all too familiar, indicates it's time to press for full global sanctions against the energy corporations and oil infrastructure that finances the Sudanese regime's brutality. Click here to sign a petition and join SaveDarfur's campaign to encourage Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice to press for tough sanctions at Monday's strategy meeting with China and France.

Be Responsible for History

Anyone who has read my post of a few weeks ago on my visit to Auschwitz knows that I came away less than pleased with how the place has been preserved and is treated today. Well, there’s another aspect of it that bothers me, too.

Historians and the people who design and maintain museums have a sacred responsibility to convey the past in the objective light of truth. Unfortunately, as we all know, history is as malleable and as valuable as gold to those who would abuse it. Auschwitz is a prime example.

Throughout the communist period, authourities all over Eastern Europe misrepresented the Holocaust by playing down its Jewish aspect, as much as that was possible. It would be nice to think that perhaps they did this out of a misguided attempt to equally include the non-Jewish victims of Nazi oppression, but we know it was really the result of anti-Semitism.

Today, Auschwitz looks more like a shrine to Polish nationalism and martyrdom than a monument to Jewish suffering. Several buildings are devoted to exhibits of Polish suffering and heroism. The other displays devoted to Jews identify them by their nationalities first and foremost. A single building tells of the overall Jewish experience.

I’d like to think that this is because of a desire to portray the martyred Jews as members of a larger Polish (and European) community rather than the worthless and persecuted minority that the Nazis defined them as. I know differently, however. This is a prime example of what happens when national governments have control over how history is passed on to future generations in state museums.

There was so much more to the Holocaust than the terrible sufferings of Polish political prisoners at Auschwitz. It could be argued that the torture and killing of such prisoners was the original purpose of Auschwitz, but when so few people go down the road and see the cemetery of nearly a million Jews at Birkenau and little mention is made of them, history is misrepresented.

Post a comment on how you think we can remedy problems like this.

"Watershed moment for human rights"

For the first time, an international criminal court convicted war criminals for the conscription of child soldiers. The ruling took place in Sierra Leone, where former military leaders were charged for 11 war crimes. The AP quotes David Crane, who is the founding prosecutor of the Sierra Leone Special Court:

He called the ruling a watershed moment for human rights. "This particular judgment sets the cornerstone forever -- those who recruit children into an armed force are criminally liable," Crane said.

During 10 years of war, high numbers of child soldiers were recruited in Sierra Leone and neighboring Liberia. According to the AP:

In Liberia, Taylor's men are accused of organizing the so-called Small Boys Unit, which conscripted youngsters, armed them with machine guns and baptized them with names like Babykiller.

While the Court's conviction marks a bright spot for human rights advocates, child soldiers continue to suffer in places like Northern Uganda. Setting precedents through punishment is essential, but it is now the international community's responsibility to build a future for these child soldiers and prevent future atrocities such as the crimes in Sierra Leone from happening again.

Games of diplomacy

Much to the chagrin of activists....the Sudanese government has yet again denied the alleged acceptance of UN command over a hybrid peacekeeping force in Darfur.

For more analysis, see this entry.

An Axis of Peace for Darfur

The ENOUGH project, founded by some distinguished veterans of the Darfur advoacy community, has come out with a new report entitled An Axis of Peace for Darfur. This thoughtful policy document outlines the different reasons that China, France, and the United States- the countries with the most leverage in Darfur- have an interest in ending the violence there. Check it out for a fresh perspective on the diplomatic campaign for Darfur, as well as some action items.

Sacrificing Darfur to fight terror?

The Jordan Times published an article titled "As Darfur bleeds, Sudan helps US fight terror." Isn't it ironic that a country can "fight terror" yet perpetrate it at the same time? The basic premise of the article is that the United States needs Sudan to help track Al Qaeda in East Africa and that is why the Bush administration has been soft on Darfur. Colin Thomas-Jensen, an analyst with the International Crisis Group, says that the US is conflicted over reacting to Darfur and using intelligence from Sudan. "The overriding strategic objective of the US in the Horn of Africa is fighting terrorism and so these two issues are now clashing."

The article goes on to talk about Osama bin Laden's role in US policy toward Sudan. He lived in Sudan in the mid-1990s and Sudan divulges information on Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups to the US. "To placate its critics, Sudan has suggested that Darfur rebels are of the same ilk as Al Qaeda and is seeking to maximise the benefits from its decision to expel Ben Laden and align itself with Washington." The article ends with a quote from Abdel Bari Atwan, editor of Al Quds Al Arabi newspaper in London:

If there's a foreign intervention and if there's a Sudanese party who doesn't like this foreign intervention, this will open a space for Al Qaeda to come and fill. So they are waiting for these forces to come, exactly the way they were waiting for the American forces to go to Iraq, to fight them.

With this possibility in mind, what do we do? Have we been mistaken about what is needed in Darfur or are we right on track? Is the possibility of terrorist activity in Darfur a real threat? And how valuable is Sudan's intelligence? And how can we justify allowing genocide to continue in order to fight terrorism?

What investments?

This past weekend, I had the priveledge of meeting and talking with the executive director of the genocide intervention network, Mark Hannis. His stories were inspiring and his ideas innovative.

One thing we discussed was how to make Darfur a campaign issue in 2008. Because I live in a swing state and famously contested county (Palm Beach County was the county of chads and butterfly ballots in 2000), candidates usually pop in pretty often during election season. So Mark reccommended local activists try to bring the issue up with candidates at public appearances as much as possible.


It just so happened I was meeting my favorite candidate, Dennis Kucinich on Saturday night at a political event. With Mark's advice on my mind, I boldly approached little Dennis during cocktail hour (blabbering out "I really, really love you" as my personal introduction) and then asked why he hadn't yet divested his personal investments from Sudan. (I know this from GINET's Darfur 2008 election project, askthecandidates.org)

He looked at me and blinked. "WHAT investments? I barely own my own home," he said, his elfin face obscured by righteousness. And suddenly it all came back to me; I saw, in memory, the websites that noted Kucinich was the poorest candidate, the son of factory workers, the one with only a few thousand dollars to his name.

So I laughed it off, and walked away, feeling sheepish.

One World, One Dream: Keeping China in the Spotlight

China's slogan for the 2008 Olympics sits awkwardly with its support of many brutal regimes, including that of Sudan. Mia Farrow and others have expolited this dark secret to enormous effect with the Olympic Dream for Darfur campaign, as referenced by Elizabeth Milligan in her entry below. China has responded with its toughest stance yet towards the Sudanese government's violence.

Their efforts prove that international public opinion- our opinion- matters to China. Now Congress has gotten into the act. Senate Resolution 203 was introducted on May 16, but has languished in committee for over a month. The resolution calls on China to "use its unique influence and economic leverage to stop genocide and violence in Darfur, Sudan." As a resolution, it does not have force of law, but would send a powerful public signal to the Chinese government that the American people care, and so does their government. It is not anti-China, but simply calls on Beijing to do the right thing. There is no reason not to pass this resolution.

Click here to learn about the bill, and then ask your representatives (especially if they're on the Foreign Relations Committee) to get S.Res. 203 out of committee and start doing good!

Also check out the House version, H.Res. 422

Navigating Nuances

Last week, Julie Flint wrote:

"The people who will "save" Darfur are the Darfurians. And they may do it under our noses -- slowly, painfully and without our assistance, whatever we eventually choose to do." Flint suggests that activists are ineffective with a shallow understanding of the contextual situation of Darfur, Sudan, and the region."

Does that absolve us from the responsibility to protect - or try to protect? Are the merits of academia lost by taking action? Or is action ineffective when it lacks the scholarly background of an expert?

STAND responds here.

Shaming China

This morning, actress/activist Mia Farrow, Sudan expert Professor Eric Reeves, and Director Jill Savitt officially launched the Olympic Dream for Darfur campaign, meant to garner international support for a movement to shame China into using its leverage to end the genocide in Darfur.

Check it out.

Sudan accepts peacekeepers

Yes! Sudan has finally accepted a hybrid African Union (AU)-United Nations (UN) peacekeeping force in Darfur. The BBC article said that the AU will manage everyday operations and the UN will provide between 17,000 and 19,000 soldiers, mostly from African and Asian countries. Unfortunately, the deployment will probably not be until next year. Nevertheless, I am thrilled to hear that Sudan is caving in to international pressure. I think we can look at this as a milestone but not a stopping point. We must still focus on humanitarian aid and continue with the divestment movement.

Check This Out

Elizabeth let me know that Peter Balakian did an interview with the Committee on Conscience's Jerry Fowler about "The Burning Tigris" (see my post below) for the podcast series Voices on Genocide Prevention.

Check the interview out here.

What I’m Reading VI

It’s remarkable to look back as reactions to past genocides and see how little has changed today. In his book “The Burning Tigris: The Armenian Genocide and America’s Response,” Peter Balakian reveals one of the first international human rights movements that took place a century ago in response to the Armenian Genocide.

The “Save Armenia” movement of a century ago looks a lot like the “Save Darfur” movement of today. Back then, letter writing campaigns targeted politicians. Many people called for military intervention. Brave journalists went on the ground to show the world the face of genocide. Massive fundraising and humanitarian aid programs were launched to feed and clothe the survivors of genocide. And also like today, political squabbling and “national interests” kept the powerful nations of the world from helping the victims.

If you have any interest in either the Armenian Genocide (for which this book is a good introductory history) or the history of human rights activism in the United States, then I urge you to read “The Burning Tigris.”

The Amusement Park of Evil

A couple of weeks ago I was in Poland touring different Holocaust sites. The trip took me to the death camps Treblinka, Auschwitz I, and Birkenau. At two of these places, I was greeted by the quiet solemnity that I expected but at Auschwitz I was a bit disturbed by what I saw.

Auschwitz is the archetypal image that most people have of the Holocaust and so is the most visited of all the camps. To most people, Auschwitz is the Holocaust. That’s why I was disappointed to see the “amusement park of evil” atmosphere that it has. Groups of very young schoolchildren run all over the place and clamber over the displays. Groups on bus tours of Poland stop briefly to have a look at a gas chamber and then head off to their next stop (perhaps a vodka tasting?). The death camp is just another point on an itinerary. Tourists (adults!) stroll around and casually pose for smiling pictures as though they were in a park.

I realize that these are people who might otherwise not learn about the Holocaust or genocide, and so any exposure is good. On the other hand, the place they were so casually and disinterestedly taking in is one of the largest cemeteries and sites of mass murder in the world. It should be treated as such, but is not. Clearly, a balance has to be found between mass education and respectful memorialization.

The question is, where is that balance? Is any measure justified in the name of educating the otherwise ignorant masses? Or, should more measures be taken to guard the dignity of places like Auschwitz, even at the expense of education?

Please comment and post your thoughts.