The conflict in Darfur had begun in 2003; recently however, it has been getting progressively worse. The conflict started as a struggle between two rebel groups. Over the past years the conflict had erupted into a full-scale genocide. CNN regularly documents stories about genocide victims, rape survivors and stories told by former Sudanese soldiers.
With this in mind, why is it that the United Nations have not realised that Darfur is in dire need of external help? Why is it that it was not until the middle of last year that the United Nations did not send in troops to replace the African troops? If anything, this seems like a relapse of the 80s-90s United Nations ‘effort’ in Cambodia and Kenya. The ‘effort’ which did not take place until it had sunk in that governments of Cambodia and Kenya were committing atrocities.
Although nongovernmental aid organisations have made attempts to provide help for the people of Sudan, officials believe that such efforts are only “Band-Aid solutions, not long term solutions” (John Holmes). This is becoming more evident with the government of Sudan rejecting aid. CNN reports that the President of Sudan, Omar al-Bashir has been charged with committing war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Again, why are minimal efforts being made in Sudan? Why do the world leaders still insist on plaguing the Middle East with their presence?
Mininal efforts are being made in Sudan and Western powers spending their time and energy in the middle east is because it poses a threat to the Western world. As Islamic groups in the middle east have attacked the West with terror attacks.
ReplyDeleteWhy put time and money into a region that poses no direct threat to you. If the Middle East has attacked your citizens the logical choice is to concentrate your effort their rather than a country that poses no direct threat to you.